<<

Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU

Master's Theses Graduate College

8-1977

Analysis of an Interlobate Boundary in the Wisconsinan Drift of Kalamazoo County and Adjacent Areas in Southwestern Michigan

Norman A. Lovan

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses

Part of the Commons

Recommended Citation Lovan, Norman A., "Analysis of an Interlobate Boundary in the Wisconsinan Drift of Kalamazoo County and Adjacent Areas in Southwestern Michigan" (1977). Master's Theses. 2207. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/2207

This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ANALYSIS OF AN INTERLOBATE BOUNDARY IN THE WISCONSINAN DRIFT OF KALAMAZOO COUNTY AND ADJACENT AREAS IN SOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN

by

Norman A. Lovan

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the Degree of Master of Science

Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan August 19 77

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ANALYSIS OF AN INTERLOBATE BOUNDARY IN THE WISCONSINAN DRIFT OF KALAMAZOO COUNTY AND ADJACENT AREAS IN SOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN

Norman A. Lovan, M.S.

Western Michigan University, 1977

ABSTRACT

A detailed investigation of selected textural and

mineralogical aspects of tills in southwestern Michigan is

used to define an interlobate boundary relationship be­

tween the Wisconsinan ice of the and Saginaw

lobes. Bedrock underlying the study area contributed lit­

tle to the bulk composition of the tills investigated.

However, morainal development in the study area shows

strong correlation with bedrock topography.

In a discussion of the deglaciation of Michigan and

the study area, a history of morainal development is re­

viewed and attention is focused on the reentrant district

located in Kalamazoo and neighboring counties. Attempts

to delineate t i l l s of the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes

using textural and magnetic susceptibility data were in­

conclusive. However, the character and extent of an in ­

terlobate boundary relationship in the study area is de­

limited by ratios of heavy minerals, as well as, ratios of

the 7A/10A peaks produced by clays in X-ray diffractograms.

i i

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to extend my sincere thanks to Dr. W. Thomas

Straw who suggested this problem and encouragingly direct­

ed my efforts during the course of the study. My thanks

also go to Drs. Lloyd Schmaltz, W. David Kuenzi, and Cas­

par Cronk for their suggestions and review of the manu­

script. Appreciation need also be expressed to Dr. W. B. Harrison of Western Michigan U niversity's Geology Depart­

ment for suggestions and aid during sample preparation and

to Dr. Stoline of W.M.U.’s Mathematics Department for aid

in the statistical analysis of my data. Additionally, I extend my appreciation to my fellow graduate students, es­

pecially Robert Kell, Hall Taylor, Jonathan "Nate” Fuller,

and Warren P. French for th e ir continuous moral support

and criticism and to Bob Havira of Western Michigan Uni­

v e rs ity 's Geology Department for photographic work.

To Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, and Dr.

J. Mead I express my thanks for the use of their magnetic

susceptibility bridge. Also, to Dr. Ned Bleuer of the

Indiana Geological Survey I extend my appreciation for

suggestions on sample analysis and aid while at Indiana

University. During the first two years of my study I was the re­

cipient of Graduate Fellowships funded by Western Michigan

University's Graduate College and the Department of Geo- i i i

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. i v

logy. Additionally, I received a research grant funded by

the Graduate College.

Finally, I wish to express my gratitude to Linda

Lovan for her continued encouragement, to my parents,

Paul and Mary Lou Lovan, a special appreciation for the

financial and moral aid in what seemed like a c r is is , and

to Janell B. Smith for her assistance in the typing and

preparation of the manuscript, as well as, her personal

friendship. To all these people and many others I extend

my thanks.

*"*' Norman A. Lovan

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. INFORMATION TO USERS

This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.

1.The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page{s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find ja good image of the page in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from (eft to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.

4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced.

5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received.

University Microfilms International 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 USA St. John's Road, Tyler's Green High Wycombe, Bucks, England HP10 8HR

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. MASTERS THESIS 13^10,287 LOVAN, Norman Alan ANALYSIS OF AN INTERLOBATE BOUNDARY IN THE WISCONSINAN DRIFT OF KALAMAZOO COUNTY AND ADJACENT AREAS IN SOUTHWESTERN MICHIGAN.

Western Michigan University, M.S., 1977 Geology

Xerox University Microfiims,Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

A b s t r a c t ...... i i Acknowledgements ...... i i i

Table of contents ...... v

List of figures ...... v ii

L ist of t a b l e s ...... x

Introduction ...... 1

Bedrock geology ...... 4

Glacial geology ...... 6

Introduction ...... 6

Till classification ...... 12

Deglaciation of Michigan ...... 17

Terminal and lateral in the study area . 22

Valparaiso morainic system ...... 22

Kendall ...... 24

Kalamazoo morainic system ...... 27

Tekonsha-morainic system ...... 29

L o c a tio n ...... 30

T ech n iq u es ...... 31

Field sampling ...... 31

Laboratory analysis ...... 32 Analysis of an interlobate boundary ...... 35 Textural analysis ...... 37

v

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. PAGE

Magnetic susceptibility analysis ...... 45

Heavy mineral analysis ...... 52

X-ray diffraction of clays ...... 58

Relationship of bedrock topography to mineral content in local tills ...... 64

Relationship of bedrock topography to morainal development ...... 66

Deglaciation of the study area ...... 72

Summary and conclusions ...... 77 Suggestions for future research ...... 80

References cited ...... 82

Appendix I ...... 89

Appendix I I ...... 117

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF FIGURES

PAGE

Figure I. Map of southwestern Michigan showing the study area and sampling grid, and the maximum eastward extension of the Lake Michigan lobe during Wisconsinan glaciation according to Shah (1971) . . 3

2. Bedrock geology of southwestern Michi­ gan illu s tr a tin g the study area and the sample g r i d ...... 5 3. Subdivisions of in ...... 7 4. Nebraskan, Kansan, Illin o ia n , and Wisconsinan drift borders in North America ...... 9

5. Stratigraphic classification of the Wisconsinan glacial deposits in I l l i n o i s ...... 11

6. Classification of tills showing the relationship between glacial drift in transport to the type of till d e v elo p ed ...... 15

7. Map illustrating Wisconsinan morainal development of the Lake Michigan, Saginaw, and lobes in southern Michigan, and northern Illinois, Indiana, andOhio ...... 18

8. Wisconsinan morainal systems in M i c h i g a n ...... 21 9. Map of southwestern Michigan showing Wisconsinan morainal systems in re­ lation to Shah’s interlobate boundary (19 71) and the studyare a ...... 2 3 10. Map of southwestern Michigan and the study area showing the location of sample sta tio n s ...... 25

v ii

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. v i i i

PAGE

Figure 11. Plot of percent sand versus percent mud for samples from deposits of the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes .... 39

12. Histogram of the sand/mud ratio of samples from the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes showing the mean sand/mud ratio for each group of s a m p le s ...... 40

13. Ternary plot of the very coarse-coarse (18+35 mesh), medium (60 mesh), and fine-very fine (120+230 mesh) sand fractio ns in samples from both the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes showing the mean from each group of samples . . 41

14. Graph of percent heavy minerals in the fine plus very fine (120+230 mesh) sand fractio ns in samples from Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobe deposits illu s tra tin g the mean percentage from each group of s a m p le s ...... 42 15. Histogram of the percent heavy minerals in the fine plus very fine (120+230 mesh) sands in samples from deposits of the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes illustrating the mean percentage for each group of samples ...... 43

16. Histogram of the magnetic susceptibility of samples taken from deposits of the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes i l l u s ­ trating the mean magnetic susceptibi­ lity of each group of samples ...... 50

17. Ternary plots of heavy mineral assem­ blages occurring in the fine plus very fine (120+230 mesh) sand fra c ­ tions of samples from t i l l s of the Saginaw and Lake Michigan lobes .... 53

18. Map of the study area showing morainal development, and in terlo b ate boundaries based on garnet/epidote+hornblende ratios, X-ray diffraction analysis of 7A/10A peak- height ratios, and the morphology of weak morainal ridges developed by the Lake Michigan lo b e ...... 56

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. i x

PAGE

Figure 19. Histogram of garnet/epidote+hornblende ratios from till samples of the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes i l l u s t r a ­ ting the mean garnet/epidote+horn­ blende ratio for each group of sam­ ples ...... 57

20. X-ray diffractogram s of surface t i l l samples from the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes showing the 7A/10A peaks produced by clay minerals .... 59

21. Histogram of 7A/10A peak-height ratios from X-ray diffractogram s of samples from Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobe deposits showing the mean 7A/10A peak-height ratio in each group of s a m p le s ...... 63 22. Map of ice flow directions during the Wisconsinan glaciation of North America showing the provenance and possible movement directions of the jasper conglomerate erratic asso­ ciated primarily with Saginaw lobe t i l l s ...... 67

23. Map showing the bedrock topography of southwestern Michigan ...... 70

24. Map illustrating the relationship of bedrock topography to morainal deve­ lopment in southwestern Michigan . . . 71

25. Surface geology of southwestern Michigan. 74

26. Photograph of a fold occurring in the d r if t of the Kalamazoo moraine of the Lake Michigan lobe indicating the overriding and deformation of the moraine by Lake Michigan lobe ice in Wisconsinan t im e ...... 75

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF TABLES

PAGE

TABLE 1. Location, textural, magnetic suscepti­ bility, X-ray, and garnet/epidote + hornblende d a ta ...... 90

2. Sieve d a ta ...... 99

3. Textural data ...... 105

4. Percent range of predominant heavy m i n e r a l s ...... 51

5. Sample statio n s associated with each half lobe designation ...... 120

6. S ta tis tic a l data from sand/mud ra tio , percent heavy minerals in the fine + very fine (120+230 mesh) sands, mag­ netic susceptibility, X-ray diffrac­ tion, and garnet/epidote+hornblende ratio analyses ...... 121

7. Mann-Whitney U Test for sand/mud ratio and percent heavy minerals in the 120+230 mesh s a n d s ...... 124

8. Mann-Whitney U Test for magnetic su s­ c e p tib ility and X-ray d iffra c tio n d a t a ...... 125

9. Mann-Whitney U Test for garnet/epidote + hornblende d a ta ...... 126

1 0 . T Test for sand/mud ratio and percent heavy minerals in the 120+230 mesh s a n d s ...... 127

11. T Test for magnetic susceptibility and X-ray diffraction d a ta ...... 128 12. T Test for garnet/epidote+hornblende d a t a ...... 129

x

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. INTRODUCTION

Development of the surface geology of southwestern

Michigan occurred during the Wisconsinan glaciation of

North America. Of particular interest to this study are

the g la c ia l deposits in Kalamazoo County and the adjacent

areas produced by the interplay of the Lake Michigan and

Saginaw lobes of the Wisconsinan ice. To date, no relia­

ble statistical data have been used to delineate the limits

of these deposits; however, a complete understanding of

the glacial history of Michigan necessitates some compre­

hension of the boundary relationships between them.

Chamberlin (1883a and 1883b) introduced the term

"interlobate moraine" for features "formed by the joint action of two glaciers (or glacial lobes) pushing their

marginal moraines together" to produce a common boundary. Realizing the complex regional nature of the interplay of

glaciers in an interlobate area, a more general definition

would be of greater value. Thus, as defined by Rieck

(1976) and used herein, an interlobate area is an area of

drift accumulation developed in or near the reentrant dis­

trict between two lobes of glacial ice. Moraines develop­

ed in such an area may have formed when active glacial

moraines were in contact or when the active glacial ice

margins had retreated and exposed a narrow zone, 1 mile

1

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. (1.6 km) to several miles, between them (Rieck, 19 76).

Using the above d e fin itio n , much of southwestern

Michigan, and in p a rtic u la r Kalamazoo County, is a classic

interlobate area (Leverett and Taylor, 1915; Wayne and

Zumberge, 1965; Farrand and Eschman, 1974). Shah (1971) defined and drew an interlobate boundary depicting the

eastern most extension of the Lake Michigan lobe in south­

western Michigan (Fig. 1) based on the morphology of weak

morainal ridges that parallel known deposits of the Lake

Michigan lobe.

The present study is an effort to statistically de­

fine and establish the interlobate boundary relationship

produced by the in terp lay of the Lake Michigan and Saginaw

lobes in areas in and adjacent to Kalamazoo County, Michi­

gan, by determining the provenance of glacial tills.

Rieck (1976) delineated t i l l s of the Saginaw and Huron-

Erie lobes in southeastern Michigan utilizing X-ray dif­

fraction techniques, and Bleuer (1975) distinguished tills

in Indiana derived from different source areas by esta­

blishing ratios of various heavy minerals. Studies in

surrounding regions have also been successful in esta­

blishing till provenance by using mineralogic and other

techniques (Gravenor, et a l . , 1976; Derry, 1934; Anderson,

1957; Gravenor, 1951). In the present study, textural and

mineralogic data are utilized to describe the character,

extent, and contact relationship of the tills left by the

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1 NORTH r EATON CO ------CALHOUN CO “I BRANCH CO S/< s BARRY BARRY CO I — I ALLEGAN CO CASS CO ST JOSEPH CO VAN VAN BUREN CO | | 1 —J BERRIEN CO Interlobate Boundary Sample grid S tu d y are a EXPLANATION m iles Figure .1. Map of southwestern Michigan showing the study area and sampling grid, and and the eastward maximum extension of the Lake Michigan lobe during Wisconsinan g laciatio n according to Shah (1971) «

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Lake Michigan and Saginaw g lac ia l lobes. Not only is an

understanding of the nature of deglaciation in southwes­

tern Michigan enhanced, but also relatively new techniques

proven successful in other regions are used and tested in

establishing the interlobate boundary in the study area.

BEDROCK GEOLOGY

The bedrock geology of Michigan consists of two dis­

tin c t provinces (Wayne and Zumberge, 1965). All of the

Southern Peninsula and the eastern h a lf of the Upper (Nor­

thern) Peninsula consists of Cambrian to Pennsylvanian

shales, sandstones, carbonates, and evaporites of the

Michigan Basin. The western half of the Upper Peninsula

of Michigan exposes rocks of the Precambrian Canadian

Shield. These rocks are mainly Early Precambrian, Keewatin

through Algoman, g ran ites, greenstones (metamorphosed lava

flows), and metasediments; Middle Precambrian, Animikian,

iron formations and in tru siv e s; and Late Precambrian, Ke-

weenawan, lava flows, conglomerates, and sandstones (Wayne

and Zumberge, 1965; Dorr and Eschman, 19 71).

Unconsolidated glacial sediments of the study area

are underlain by the Lower Mississippian Coldwater Shale

and Marshall Sandstone (Fig. 2). No known bedrock out­

crops appear in the study area. The present knowledge of

bedrock characteristics within the study area is based on

well logs from Kalamazoo County and bedrock outcrops in

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Cn EATON COALLEGAN CO EATON COALLEGAN BRANCH BRANCH CO BARRY BARRY CO i i r t ST ST JOSEPH CO . . KALAMAZOO CO Me 1 VAN VAN BUREN CO DERR EN DERR . . Miss. ]■ Penn. Penn. Study area U. Sample grid Saginaw & Parma 3. Miss. &/or Dev. Mid. Dev. Ellsworth Ellsworth-Antrim Traverse Explanation Coldwater

T | m miles [ E rr—I u. Dev I Pu i El r°"»i | | Mm | Michigan |Mnm| Napoleon & L. Marshall r ~ I Pflr I 7 1 Grand River H | Mbp | Bayport t t % Figure 2. Bedrock geology of southwestern Michigan (after the Michigan Geologi­ (g rey ). cal Survey, 1968) illustrating the study area (heavy line) and the sample grid

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 6

adjacent areas (Shah, 1971).

As reported by Shah (1971), the Coldwater Shale in

southwestern Michigan is dominantly blue to grey and grades

upward into the Lower Marshall Sandstone. Trending north­

westward across Kalamazoo County, the Coldwater Shale forms

a belt approximately 25 miles (40 km) in width beneath the

surface drift material (Shah, 1971). Within the shales

are thin discontinuous zones of limestone, dolomite, and

clay ironstone concretions.

The Lower Marshall Sandstone occupies portions of the

northeast corner of the study area (Fig. 2). Winchell

(1861) described the Lower Marshall Sandstone as being

white, grey, green, and red in color. Clay ironstone con­

cretions are present in sandy shale lenses which are local­

ly micaceous. Plant impressions and pockets of coal have

also been reported (Shah, 1971). Paralleling the Coldwater

Shale within the study area, the Marshall Sandstone strikes

northwest and dips gently northeastward toward the basin's

center.

GLACIAL GEOLOGY

Introduction

The Pleistocene Epoch was marked by several world­

wide, synchronous glaciations. In North America at least

four separate periods of continental glaciation have been

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 7

recorded (Fig. 3).

The Nebraskan glaciation extended as far south as

Kansas and Missouri (Fig.4). Buried beneath younger drift

wherever it occurs, Nebraskan drift is best developed in

northern Missouri, eastern Nebraska, and northeastern Kan­ sas (Flint, 1957). At the close of the Nebraskan glacia­

tion a period of clim atic warming occurred and has been

named the Aftonian (Chamberlin, 1895).* Dur­

ing the Aftonian and before subsequent glacial advance,

grasses and trees flourished as recorded in the pollen of

so il p ro file s and peat lenses lying between Nebraskan and

Kansan d r if t sheets (F lin t, 1957).

Glacials Y.B.P.

0 Recent Wisconsinan 10,000 Sangomonian Illin o ian Yarmouthian Kansan Aftonian Nebraskan 1.5 Million

Figure 3. Subdivisions of the Pleistocene in North America (a fte r Dorr and Eschman, 1971).

*Interglacials are periods of clim atic warming be­ tween periods of glacial advance or glacials.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 8

West of the Mississippi River Kansan Age drift extends

beyond younger drift sheets but is overlapped by

drift in Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. Two lobes of Kansan

ice are shown in Illinois (Fig. 4); however, Flint (1957)

stated that the existence of two Kansan lobes in Illin o is

is questionable considering the "scanty" subsurface data

available. The Yarmouthian Interglacial separating the

Kansan and Illin o ian glacials is represented by a so il zone

developed in Kansan d r if t. Simonson (1954) compared so ils

developed in Kansan d r ift with modern equivalents and s t a ­

ted that the Yarmouthian climate was much like that of the

present.

Illinoian drift is best developed in Illinois with its overall drift border following a similar outline as the

subsequent Wisconsinan glaciation (Fig. 4). Tills of Illi­

noian Age are reported as being rich in clay and silt.

Leverett and Taylor (1915) described a t i l l in southeastern

Michigan which they attributed to Illinoian glaciation.

Evidence for multiple periods of glacial advance dur­

ing Illin o ian time e x ists. Frye and Leonard (1954) e sta ­

blished that a soil zone developed within the Illinoian

sediments of Kansas implies a period of warm climate that

endured for several thousand years. Studies in Nebraska

and Missouri yield correlative results (Thorp, et al. 1951;

and Davis, unpublished data in Flint, 1957). The Illinoian and Wisconsinan glaciations are separa-

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ID NEBRASKAN WISCONSINAN KANSAN ILLINOIAN 1*1. EXPLANATION Jjl*1 r*5 — * — r*5 (WIS 200 MINN MILES Figure 4. Nebraskan, Kansan, Illinoian, and Wisconsinan drift borders in North Am­ e rica (modified from F lin t, 1957).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 10

ted by a period of warmer climate called the Sangamon

Interglacial. Sangamon soils are well developed and show

about the same regional changes as do modern so ils (F lin t,

1957; Flint, 1971).

Perhaps the best known and differentiated period of paleoglaciation is that of the Wisconsinan Age. This is

easily understood when it is realized that Wisconsinan

glaciation ended less than 10,000 years ago. At its maxi­

mum extent, Wisconsinan ice reached into southern Ohio,

Indiana, and Illinois. From Illinois, the Wisconsinan

border extends westward and north through Iowa, Nebraska, and the Dakotas, then on to the Rocky Mountains (Fig. 4).

The stratigraphy of the Wisconsinan deposits are

better known than that of any other glacial age. Since around 1950, a detailed reexamination of Wisconsinan Age

deposits has been undertaken and their classification re­

viewed. Leighton (1960) and Willman and Frye (1970) e s ­

poused classifications of Wisconsinan stratigraphy which

are in use today. However, the c la s s ific a tio n of Leighton

(1960) appears to be preferred by researchers studying

Michigan's glacial deposits.

Practically all of the surface deposits covering

Michigan's lower peninsula are glacial in origin. The

majority of these deposits are the result of ice advance

and re tre a t phases of the Cary, Port Huron (Mankato), and Valders substages of the Wisconsinan glaciation (Fig. 5).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1 1 R a d i o ­ MODIFIED AFTER MODIFIED AFTER c a r b o n LEIGHTON, 1960 FRYE AND WILLMAN, y .b .p . 1970 0

5,000 HOLOCENE RECENT 10,000 * VALDERAN STAGE TraTn'P'Dc: bct ijn s mC ln T it Twocreek Int. TWOCREEKAN MANKATO (PORT L a t e STAGE HURON) GLACIAL > Bowmanvilie / w / u I n t . f 15.000 < CARY GLACIAL St. Charles 3 WOODFORDIAN < I n t . 3 STAGE H TAZAWELL GLACIAL CD CO 3 G a r d e n a I n t. t O 20.000 IOWAN GLACIAL •H U INAN ICONS AGE CQ & H H 25,000 3 F a rm C r e e k 3 FARMDALIAN Interglacial STAGE j 30.000 ■ 35.000 FARMDALE GLACIAL ALTONIAN ------STAGE E a r ly *7^/D/UUU nnn ----- SANGAMON AGE AGE

Figure 5. Stratigraphie classification of the Wiscon­ sinan glacial deposits in Illinois (modified from Shah, 1971) .

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 12

Very few, if any, exposures of pre-Wisconsinan tills occur

at the surface in Michigan. Thus, only the glacial his­

tory of Michigan during Wisconsinan time, more precisely

from Cary time to the Recent, is discussed.

Till Classification

Prior to the evolution of the glacial theory in the

second quarter of the 19th century, erratic boulders were

recognized as being deposits of transported materials

(Charlesworth, 1957; Flint, 1971). Originally these de­

posits were believed to have been lowered to the earth’s

surface after floating on ice across the landscape dur­

ing the great Biblical deluge. Subsequently, Sir Charles

Lyell, in 1830, espoused the "Drift Theory" to explain

the d istrib u tio n of these e rra tic s and Murchison (1836)

recommended the term d r if t be used in order to avoid fu r­

th er relig io u s connotations. With time, and the develop­

ment of the idea that glaciers once occuppied regions far

more extensive than at present, the term "Glacial Drift" has evolved to embrace all rock material in transport by

glacial ice, all deposits made by glacial ice, and all

deposits largely of glacial origin (Flint, 1971).

Drift has subsequently been subdivided into three

basic categories based primarily on the sedimentological

characteristics: stratified drift, unstratified drift,

and erratic boulders and clasts. Stratified drift (out-

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. wash) is that m aterial deposited in d irectly from the ice

by the action of glacial meltwaters. As outwash and er­

ratic boulders are not topics of discussion in this paper,

no further attempt will be made to define or classify them

But, because this study deals with unstratified drift

(till) the definition and classification of such material

is included.

Till, a Scottish word used to describe a coarse ob­

durate land, is defined as an aggregate whose components

are brought together and deposited directly by glacier ice

(Boulton, 1972). Being more variable than any other sedi­

ment, till is a mixture of grain sizes and rock types

(Goldthwait, 1971; Flint, 1957). Any given grain size may

constitute the bulk of an accumulated till, and the rock

types are dependent on the geologic formations over which

the glacier has ridden.

Tills have been variously classified by origin, color

texture, degree of compaction, lithologic composition, and

mode of deposition (Dreimanis, 1971). Perhaps the most

useful and fundamental classification is based on genesis;

however, the most distinctive and easily recognized pro­

perties of tills are those acquired during the process of

deposition. Thus, the most satisfactory classification is

one based on depositional modes (Flint, 1957; Boulton,

1972) .

Using the above d efin itio n and u tiliz in g the subgla-

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. cial, englacial, and supraglacial criterion of glacial

debris in transport (Fig* 6), t i l l s may be c la ss ifie d in the following manner:

A. Lodgement or basal till, deposited subglacially from d r ift m transport in the base of an active glacier. The de­ b ris is released from the ice by slow pressure melting of the flowing ice and lodged in the accumulating drift on the subglacial floor (Chamberlin, 1894; Dreimanis, 1967a; Flint, 1957; Boulton, 1972). The resulting till lacks sort­ ing, is compact, and often acquires a fissile structure (Flint, 1971).

B. Ablation till, deposited from en- glacial and supraglacial debris in the terminal area of a glacier. The glacial material is lowered to the ground as the ice melts inward from the term inus, top, and base (F lin t, 1957). T ills produced by this method are characteristically loose, noncompact, and n o n fissile .

Following several years of research with modern arctic g laciers as depositional models, Boulton (1972) suggested

th a t, by using the above c la s s ific a tio n , existin g models

for the interpretation of ancient tills and the sequences

in which they lie are often too simple. Going even further

Boulton stated that "many Pleistocene and earlier sequences

currently thought of as products of repeated glacier ad­

vance and readvance, may be products of a single retreat phase by a glacier with a thick englacial debris load."

With th is in mind Boulton offers a refinement of the

ablation till category as follows:

A. Flow till, released supraglacially

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. M cn

(by (by lodgement or basal melting ) (by means(by of surface melting) Basal till Ablation till Dreimanis, 1967a

Basal or Flint, 1957 Local till Ablation till Lodgement till Deformation till Flow till Boulton, 1972 Melt-out till

drift drift Englacial Subglacial in transport

rock rock or Sediment Glacial Drift Glacial Figure 6. Classification of tills showing the relationship between glacial drift in o

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 16

and undergoing subsequent deformation as a result of subaerial flow (Boulton, 1972) . T ills developed by th is method, are very often brought from a subgla­ cial position to a supraglacial posi­ tion along debris bands within the ice and therefore may contain many features characteristic of basal tills (Boulton, 1968).

B. Melt-out tills, deposited either supraglacially or subglacially from stagnant ice beneath a confining over­ burden (Boulton, 1970b; Boulton, 1972). In a glacial sequence from which the ice has vanished, melt-out tills re­ present the stratigraphic position of the depositing glacier (Boulton, 1970). The significance in Boulton's refinement (1972) is

that the ablation till/basal till doublet postulated by

F lin t (1957) may develop e n tire ly suprag lacially . As sub­

glacial till is brought to a supraglacial position along

glacial debris bands, subsequent downslope flow may trans­

late parts of the till to the upper surface of the ice.

Once exposed to subaerial processes, sorting of the upper

portion of the till may produce a lower massive element

with an upper, washed and often crudely stratified element.

If then, given the association of supraglacial outwash,

tripartite till/outw ash/till sequences may develop which

are the result of a single glacial retreat phase rather

than multiple advance and retreat (Boulton, 1968; 1971;

1972).*

*For information on fabric data as related to tills, see Holmes, 1941, Flint, 1957, 1971, and Boulton, 1971.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Deglaciation of Michigan

The glaciation of Michigan during Cary time was ac­

complished by the nearly simultaneous advance of glacial

ice via the Lake Michigan, Lake Erie, and Saginaw basins

(Wayne and Zumberge, 1965). Completely covering Michigan,

the Cary ice extended into southern I llin o is , Indiana, and

Ohio. At its maximum extension, 18,000 years ago, the Cary

ice stood near the Ohio River and resulted in the deposition

of the Minooka, Iroquois-Packerton, and Union City term inal

moraines (Fig. 7) of the Lake Michigan lobe, Saginaw lobe,

and Erie lobe respectively (Eschman and Farrand, 1974). As the ice of all three glacial lobes began to retreat

from its position of maximum extension, the Saginaw lobe

ice dissipated more rapidly than the ice of the Lake Michi­

gan and Lake Erie lobes. Leverett (1915) reasoned th a t,

during advance, the Saginaw lobe ice had overridden an area

of greater topographic relief than either the Lake Michigan

or Lake Erie lobes. The resulting thickness of Saginaw ice

must, therefore, have been less than that of its counter­

parts and the movement of Saginaw ice correspondingly

weaker. Additionally, Leverett (1915) added that excessive loading of Saginaw lobe ice resulting from convergence with

the adjacent Lake Michigan and Lake Erie lobes may also have

effected the weaker movement of the Saginaw lobe. With con-

17

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 00 NORTH Saginaw lobe drift drum llns m e ltw a te r Explanation Saginaw lobe moraines Erlelobedrlfton TH m ( fogf Erie lobe morainesE 3 L-- J Lake moraines Michigan lobe 11 11 Tazewell moraines MILES MICHIGAN LAKE Figure 7. Map illustrating Wisconsinan morainal development o£ the Lake Michigan, U, U, Union City moraine; Ms, Mississinewa moraine; Sa, Salamonie moraine; Fw, Fort Wayne Ti, TinleyS, moraine; Sturgis V, moraine; Valparaiso T, moraine; Tekonsha moraine; I, Mx, Maxinkuckee Iroquois moraine; moraine; P, K, Packerton Kalamazoo moraine; moraine; Saginaw, and Lake Erie lobes in southern Michigan, and northern I llin o is , Indiana, and moraine; Wa, Wabash moraine; D, Defiance moraine). Ohio (a fte r Zumberge, 1960: W, West moraine; M, M arseilles moraine; Mi, Minooka moraine; Ma, Manhattan moraine; C, Chatsworth moraine; LB, ;

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 19

tinued retreat of Cary ice, the first portion of Michigan

(south-central Michigan) to become ice free occurred ap­

proximately 15,000 years b.p. (Wayne and Zumberge, 1965).

Evidence for the more rapid retreat of Saginaw lobe

ice as compared with ice of the Lake Michigan and Lake Erie

lobes is found 2 8 miles (45 km) southwest of Ann Arbor,

Michigan, and in Steuben and DeKalb Counties, Indiana. At

these locations clay-rich tills of the Erie lobe overlie

sandier textured t i l l s of the Saginaw lobe (Zumberge, 1960;

Wayne and Thornbury, 1955; Wayne and Zumberge, 1965). Additional support exists in northeastern Indiana and

south-central Michigan where outwash sands and gravels of

the Erie lobe occupy areas previously inhabited by the

Saginaw lobe (Wayne and Zumberge, 1965).

The strongest evidence supporting rapid recession of

Saginaw ice , as well as providing a means of co rrelation

for Cary age moraines, is the Kankakee Torrent. Ekblaw

and Athy (1925) established the coalescence of melt-water

channels heading at the Tekonsha moraine of the Erie lobe (Fig. 7). The Kankakee Torrent discharged southwestward

along the east-southeastern edge of the Lake Michigan lobe

and across the northwestern corner of Indiana to Illinois. Dreimanis and Morner (1973) recognized a major flu c ­

tuation in the Erie lobe ice that was synchronous with the to rre n t, the Erie Interstad e. Kunkle (1963) correlated

lake beds in southwestern Ontario with erosional channels

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 20

in the Huron River valley which indicates ice recession north of Lake Erie approximately 15,600 years ago. Far-

rand and Eschman (1974) noted th a t an o sc illa tio n of th is

magnitude has not yet been recognized for the ice of the

Lake Michigan lobe.

Following the Erie Interstade, the ice readvanced into

southeastern Michigan culminating about 14,800 years ago

(Dreimanis and Morner, 1973). From this point in time the

Cary ice continued its overall retreat with only minor re­

advances .

The Cary ice retreated northward to approximately the

Straits of Mackinac. A bryophyte bed is exposed nine miles

(14.4 km) south of the s t r a it s in Cheboygan County (Far-

rand, et al., 1969). Radiocarbon dates of 13,300 y.b.p.

are given for material from this bed. This 1 cm thick mat

of mosses indicates that the Cary ice front must have r e ­

trea te d at le a st th is far north (Farrand and Eschman,

1974).

Readvance of the ice in Port Huron time resulted in

the formation of the Port Huron moraine, 13,000 y.b.p.

(Hough, 1958) (Fig. 8). According to Dorr and Eschman

(1971), all glacial deposits south of the Port Huron

moraine are Cary in age. The Port Huron ice reached as

fa r south as Muskegon and Milwaukee (Farrand and Eschman,

1974). Tills of this moraine are characterized as being blue to grey-blue and quite sandy in places (Wayne and

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 21

miles

Explanation

W isconsinan end moraines

1 Sturgis moraine

2 Tekonsha moraine

3 Kalamazoo moraine

4 Kendall moraine

Figure 8. Wisconsinan morainal systems in Michigan (after Michigan Geological Survey, 1975).

Zumberge, 1965). In contrast, the later Valderan tills are

red to pink. With recession of Port Huron ice, Valders ice advanced

from the northeast to a p o sitio n proximal to the Port Huron

Moraine in the northern part of the Southern Peninsula

(Wayne and Zumberge, 1965). No end moraines were built by

Valderan ice, but near trend

northwestward indicating a radial flow from the central

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 22

Lake Superior region (Wayne and Zumberge, 1965). With re ­

treat of the last Valderan ice, all of Michigan was ice

free about 10,000 years b.p. (Broecker and Farrand, 1963) leaving behind the present glacial landforms (Fig. 8).

Terminal and Lateral Moraines in the Study Area

The study area, which centers in Kalamazoo County,

was completely covered by two lobes of the Wisconsinan con­

tinental glacier. The Lake Michigan lobe advanced into

the study area from the northwest. The Saginaw lobe ad­

vanced from the northeast. With final retreat of the ice

fronts in Cary time, bold morainic systems were left to

cover the landscape.

Portions of five (5) morainal systems in the study

area were left by the Lake Michigan and/or Saginaw lobes.

The Lake Michigan lobe is responsible for portions or all

of the Valparaiso, Kendall, Kalamazoo, Tekonsha, and

Sturgis moraines. The Saginaw lobe built portions of the

Kalamazoo, Sturgis, and Tekonsha moraines (Fig. 9).

The following morainal descriptions are based largely

on work by Leverett and Taylor (1915).

Valparaiso morainic system

A segment of the Valparaiso morainic system of the

Lake Michigan lobe occupies the northwestern corner of the

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. study area in southeastern Allegan County and northeastern

Van Buren County, Michigan (Fig. 9). This morainic system

extends from the Wisconsin-Illinois line around the sou­

thern end of Lake Michigan through northern Indiana and

northward to near Rockford, Michigan. Here it joins its

correlative moraine of the Saginaw lobe.

The Valparaiso morainic system constitutes the drai­

nage divide at the head of Lake Michigan separating waters

flowing to the St. Lawrence and M ississippi Rivers. Topo-

EXPLANATION

Wisconsinan end moraine

Interlobate boundary (Shah, 1 9 7 1 )

Figure 9. Map of southwestern Michigan showing Wiscon­ sinan morainal systems in relation to Shah's Interlobate boundary (1971) and the study area (morainal systems a fte r Michigan Geological Survey, 1975; V, Valparaiso; K, Kendall T, Tekonsha; Ka, Kalamazoo; S, S tu rg is).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 24

graphic relief along the inner border of the moraine is

quite conspicuous, rising 100 to 200 feet or more to its

crest (Leverett and Taylor, 1915) . Conversely, the relief

along the outer border is somewhat less, ranging in general

from 50 feet or less to around 75 feet.

The thickness of drift averages about 200 feet along

the entire extent of the moraine in Indiana and Michigan,

but a wide range of till compositions exists over this

distance. The Wisconsinan drift in Illinois tends to be

a blue clayey till. Eastward toward Valparaiso, Indiana,

clay continues to predominate over sand and gravel, but

beyond this, to the northeast, sand and gravel are predo­ minate over clay. Sample stations 58 and 59 (Fig. 10) are

located on the . Tills at these locali­

ties are very sandy with boulders ranging to 8 inches

(20.32 cm) in diameter. Most boulders consist of igneous

and metamorphic lithologies of derivation.

Kendall moraine

The Kendall moraine is located in the northeastern

corner of Van Buren County a few miles north of Paw Paw,

Michigan (Fig. 9). Approximately nine miles (14.4 km) long

in a northeast-southwest direction, the Kendall moraine

averages 1.5 to 2.5 miles (2.4 to 4 km) in width.

North of the village of Kendall knolls exhibit a re­

lief of 60 to 80 feet (18.28 to 24.38 m), whereas, south

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 73 CD ■o-5 o Q. C o CD Q.

■o CD

(C/)f)

O CO BARRY COALLEGAN EATON CO ■Oo

Expl anation >74 75 CALHOUN CO 29/32(^14^3 gg 40 3"3. Primary stations CD VAN BUREN CO

CD ■o Secondary stations o 38* 42 Q. C a Study area o ■o KALAMAZOO CO o

CD Q. miles BERRIEN CO COST. JOSEPH COCASS BRANCH CO

■o CD NORTH C/) C/)

Figure 10. Map of southwestern Michigan and the study area (heavily outlined) show­ ing the location of sample stations. Secondary sample stations are circled.

l/ltv) 26

of the village the relief averages 25 to 30 feet (7.62 to

9.14 m).

Extending northeastward, the Kendall moraine ter­

minates in a swamp. East of this swamp a weak ridge ex­

tends to the northeast and connects with the inner border

of the Kalamazoo moraine. Because of this relationship,

Leverett (1915) assigned the Kendall moraine to the Kala­

mazoo morainal system of the Lake Michigan lobe. Dis­

agreeing with Leverett, Terwilliger (1954) correlated the

Kendall moraine with the Valparaiso morainic system. By

studying terraces of equal elevation along the sides of

the Dowagiac Drainageway and the east side of Prospect

Hill, Terwilliger concluded that Prospect Hill and the low moraine upon which Decatur is situated are contemporaneous

with the Kendall moraine.

Till samples from eight locations were collected

along the Kendall moraine (Fig. 10, stations 23 through

29, and 31). Its tills are generally poorly consolidated,

sandy to bouldery, and red to red-brown in color. Leverett

(1915) reported blue t i l l at depths w ithin the moraine and

characterized the surface appearance as being bouldery.

Shah (1971) recorded the presence of red jasper conglo­

merate at the north end of the Kendall moraine. Because

the red jasper conglomerate is predominantly associated

with Saginaw lobe depo sits, Shah (1971) asserted th a t the Kendall moraine is a deposit of the Saginaw lobe. In a

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 27

paper concerning the source of the above red jasper con­

glomerate e rr a tic s , Slawson (1925) sta te d the following:

MIn the Wisconsin drift the eastern limit of these erratics is marked in Michigan by the moraines bordering the glacial lake beds and in Ohio by a line running south of Norwalk through Mansfield and east of Dayton. On the west a lim ited number of the boulders have been deposited by the eastern half of the Lake Michigan lobe. In general, though, the great bulk of them were transported by the ice of the Saginaw lobe."

X-ray data and analysis of heavy minerals on samples col­

lected on the Kendall moraine show conclusively that tills

of the Kendall moraine belong to the Lake Michigan lobe.

Kalamazoo morainic system

The Kalamazoo morainic system was constructed by the

joint action of the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes. The

junction of the two correlative morainic systems is lo­

cated slig h tly north of the study area in Barry County

(Fig. 9). It is here that the Kalamazoo morainic system reaches its greatest elevation, 1050 feet above sea level.

In Michigan the Kalamazoo moraine of the Lake Michigan

lobe is comprised of two nearly parallel ridges which trend

in a northeast-southwest direction. The outer ridge (eas­

tern ridge) extends from Prairieville southwestward to

South Bend, Indiana, where it is interrupted by a gravel

plain along the St. Joseph River. The inner or western

ridge parallels the outer ridge and is traceable to a loca-

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 28

tion approximately six miles (9.6 km) west of South Bend.

The relief along the outer border is slight as a

gravel plain is built up nearly to its crest throughout

its length. Conversely, the relief along the inner border

ridge ranges from 50 feet (15.2 m) in southern Michigan to 200 feet (60.9 m) as the moraine extends northward.

Surface tills of both the inner and outer moraines are

loose textured and range from clay-rich to very sandy.

Cobbles to 8 inches (20.3 cm) in diameter commonly occur

dispersed in the till. In most instances the surface drift

is less than 1.5 meters thick and is underlain by strati­

fied and often crossbedded sands and gravels. A grey or

bluish clay-rich compact t i l l is located at sample sta tio n

3 (Fig. 10) at the corner of Ravine Road and Douglas Ave­

nue in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Similar tills are found ex­

posed in 30 to 50 foot cliffs in the Lake Border moraine

along the Lake Michigan shore line in Allegan County (Fig.

10, stations 60 and 61). Perhaps the blue clay-rich nature is due to the underlying Lower Mississippian Coldwater

Shale (Fig. 2).

The Kalamazoo morainic system of the Saginaw lobe

joins its correlative system of the Lake Michigan lobe in

southwestern Barry County (Fig. 9). From this junction the

Saginaw lobe portion of these moraines extends southeast­

ward and eventually connects with the Mississinawa moraine

of the Huron-Erie lobe in Washtenaw County.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 29

Relief along the Saginaw lobe portion of the morainic

system is slight. In most places it is little more than

30 feet (9.1 m) and rarely exceeds 50 feet (15.2 m). In

Jackson County the area around Portage swamp has 150 feet

(45.7 m) of relief and is the most prominent portion of the

moraine. Tills within the moraine are generally sandy, result­

ing from erosion of the underlying sandstone units. Boul­

ders of local bedrock and Canadian Shield derivation are

commonly abundant.

Tekonsha morainic system *»**"-

4 Within the study area, the Tekonsha morainic system

is located in western Calhoun County and eastern Kalamazoo

County (Fig. 9). The Tekonsha moraine of the Saginaw lobe

is joined at its northwest and southeast ends by correla­

tive moraines of the Lake Michigan and Huron-Erie lobes,

respectively, and has a general width of 4 to 5 miles (6.4

to 8 km). Its counterpart from the Lake Michigan lobe ex­

tends southwestward from the junction and averages appro­

ximately 3 miles (4.8 km) in width.

The southwestward extension of the Tekonsha moraine

of the Lake Michigan lobe is well developed for approxi­

mately 8 miles (10.8 km). Based on the location and mor­

phology of the eastern side of the Sturgis moraine of the

Lake Michigan lobe, Straw (1977, personal communication)

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 30

is of the opinion that this portion of the Sturgis moraine

may have developed synchronously with, and therefore, re­

present an extension of the Tekonsha moraine.

Tills of the Tekonsha moraine are typically sandy and

boulder strewn. The sandy nature results in large part

from the underlying and neighboring Lower Marshall Sand­

stone. It should be noted that boulders of the Lake Mich­

igan lobe’s Sturgis and Tekonsha moraine are lithologically

sim ilar. A north trending spur of the Sturgis moraine in Cass

and St. Joseph Counties projects into the study area.

Sample statio n s 64 and 65 (Fig. 10) indicate that t i l l s of

this moraine are sandy textured and lithologically similar

to those of the Tekonsha moraine. As only a small portion

of the Sturgis moraine is represented in the study area

(Fig. 9), a discussion of this morainal system is omitted.

LOCATION

-The area under in v estig atio n , centering in Kalamazoo

County, lies in the southwestern Michigan interlobate re­

gion of the Central Lowlands physiographic province (Fig.

1). Located on the southwestern flank of the Michigan

basin, the entire study area is covered by glacially de­

rived sediments. Here the glacial materials are charac­

terized by bold morainal deposits and associated sand and gravel outwash plains. Tills within the area are generally

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 31

loose textured although compact tills are locally distri­

buted. Ibrahim (1969) reported that the drift thickness

in Kalamazoo County ranges from 50 to 650 fee t (15.2 to

198.1 m) and according to Malanchak (1973) the average

thickness is between 290 to 390 feet (88.4 to 118.9 m). The midpoint of the study area lies approximately

136 miles (217.6 km) west of Detroit, 50 miles (80 km)

south of Grand Rapids, and 112 miles (179.2 km) east of

Chicago.

TECHNIQUES

Field Sampling

In order to establish a statistical basis for initial

sampling, a grid was designed which traversed the study

area in a northwest-southeast direction (Fig. 1). Using

the in te rlo b a te boundary mapped by Shah (1971) as a focal

point, the grid area was extended into regions of known

Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobe deposits, thereby insuring

the positioning of the interlobate boundary within the

grid. Sample collection was controlled by till outcrop ex­

posure, and representative till samples were collected by

entrenching the exposures. The location of each station

is recorded in Table 1 of Appendix I and in Figure 10. Following the laboratory analysis of the initial or

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 32

primary samples, an interlobate boundary was established

within the grid. Subsequently, additional or secondary

stations were randomly established and representative

samples were collected and analyzed in order to define an

interlobate boundary throughout the remainder of the study

area.

Laboratory Analysis

Analytical techniques described in this section in­

clude various methods for obtaining textural, magnetic

susceptibility, X-ray, and heavy-mineral data. Results utilizing these techniques are then presented in the sec­

tion titled "Analysis of an Interlobate Boundary Relation­

ship ."

Using modifications of procedures outlined by Folk

(1968), a ll samples were dried at 100°F for a minimum of

eight hours. Samples were then tran sferred to the labora­

tory preparation room where they were disaggregated and

allowed to equilibrate with room temperature and humidity.

The gravel portion of each sample was removed by passing

the entire sample through a 10 mesh (2.00 mm) sieve.

Gravel portions of each sample were marked and stored;

a split (approximately 200 grams) of the remaining clays,

s i l t s , and sands was obtained and washed in 200 ml of calgonated de-ionized water for a minimum of 24 hours.

A second s p lit (75 to 100 grams) of the remaining clays,

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 33

silts, and sands was obtained. This representative of

the "bulk sample"* was taken to Indiana University (Bloo­

mington) for analysis of magnetic susceptibility (see

section on magnetic susceptibility).

Clays and s i l t s were separated from the sand fra c ­

tions by wet sieving using a 63 micron (230 mesh, 0.0625

mm) sieve and de-ionized water. The muds were washed

into a 1000 ml graduated cylinder, stirred, and allowed

to settle for 24 hours. Subsequently, basally-oriented

clay mounts were prepared for X-ray diffraction analysis

by pippetting a clay-rich suspension onto glass slides

and drying at room temperature. Dried basally-oriented

clay mounts were placed in a d essicator p a rtia lly fille d

with ethylene glycol for an additional 24 hours. It should

be noted th at slides number 3c, 10, 12, 14, 16a, 17, 18,

20, 23, 27, 29, and 31 had to be remade because of sh rin ­

kage during drying. Remaking was accomplished by passing the residual silts and clays through a 325 mesh sieve,

mixing with distilled de-ionized water, and preparing

clay mounts as described above. The remaining mud/water

solution was transferred to 1000 ml beakers, dried, and

stored.

After wet sieving and removal of the mud fractions

*Bulk sample is defined as the split sample exclud­ ing the gravel fraction and is recorded in Table 1 of Appendix I.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. from the sand fractions of each sample, the cleaned sands

were washed into beakers and dried at 125°F. Dried sand samples were then split and weighed. The splits of each

sand sample were sieved into very coarse, coarse, medium,

fine, and very fine sand fractions (10, 18, 35, 60, 120, and 230 mesh sieves), and each fraction weighed (Table 1

of Appendix I ) . Sands from the 120 and 230 mesh sieves were combined for heavy mineral analysis.

Following the procedure outlined by Krumbein and

Pettijohn (1938) and modified by Kuenzi (1974), heavy

mineral separations in the fine and very fine sand frac­

tions (120 + 230 mesh) were accomplished using bromoform

(CHBrg, d=2.89 at 20°C) and washing with acetone ((CHj^

CO). Each combined 120 plus 230 mesh sample was poured

into a separatory funnel fille d with bromoform having a

specific gravity of 2.89 at 20°C. The samples were stirred

every thirty minutes for three hours, then allowed to set­

tle for two hours (5 hours total) before the heavy minerals

were drawn off. Upon final separation of heavy-mineral

concentrations, each sample was air dried, weighed, and

split into portions preparatory to mounting on glass slides.

Grain mounts were prepared by coating heated petro-

graphic slides with a combination of approximately 0.110

grams of heavy minerals per sample and caedex (synthetic

Canada balsam ). Upon fin al curing of the caedex, a glass

cover slide was applied and grains dispersed by manipula-

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 35

tion of the cover glass. Grinding of the grain mounts was

unnecessary as grains ranging from 100 to 200 mesh yield

first order colors when illuminated under a polarizing

microscope (Bloss, 1961).

Using a Lietz polarizing microscope and mechanical

stage, a total of 500 garnet versus epidote plus hornblende

determinations were counted per slide. Data accumulated

using this technique may be found in Table 1 of Appendix I.

ANALYSIS OF AN INTERLOBATE BOUNDARY

In the past, the history of the deglaciation of any

given area has been based primarily on the morphology of bold morainal systems left by the retreating ice mass.

Michigan has been no exception. The deglaciation of Michi­

gan during Wisconsinan time left the state covered with

bold morainal systems (Fig. 8). Careful examination of

these moraines and other data have resulted in major works

by Leverett and Taylor (1915), Hough (1958), and Wayne and

Zumberge (1965), as well as many others. Their contribu­

tions have tremendously added to the knowledge of continen­

tal deglaciation during the Pleistocene.

Recent studies have focused more and more attention

on the problem of unraveling the history of areas which

developed by the complex in te rac tio n of two or more lobes

of ice during the same or repeated glaciation. To do this,

many analytical techniques have been developed and tested.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 36

In this study, textural, magnetic susceptibility, X-ray diffraction, and heavy mineral data are used to establish

the character of an interlobate boundary in the study

area.

Textural parameters have been frequently utilized in

describing and differentiating glacial sediments. In this

study, two techniques based on textural analysis of till matrix (materiaK 2 mm) were used in an attempt to dif­ ferentiate till (Dreimanis and Vagners, 1972). The per­

cent sand/percent mud ratio and the percent heavy minerals

in the 120 plus 230 mesh sands were calculated. Both

parameters were statistically analyzed. The results are

presented in following sections. Textural data accumu­

lated by exercising the above methods of analysis can be

found in Tables 1-3 of Appendix I. The use of magnetic susceptibility (MS) as a tool for

the differentiation of glacial sediments based on proven­

ance has been well established in the last decade (Vonder

Haar and Johnson, 1973; Gravenor and Stupavsky, 1974;

Gravenor, et al., 1976). Utilizing the facilities of

Indiana University's Department of Geology (Bloomington),

the magnetic susceptibility of samples from the initial

grid area were determined and statistical analysis subse­

quently performed. The results are presented in following

sections and the Appendix. It has long been recognized that the composition of a

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 37

till is reflective of the bedrock lithologies over which

the glacier traversed. Thus, it follows that if two dis­

tinct glaciers or glacial lobes originated in similar but

different areas, the composition of their resulting tills

should be dissimilar, or at the very least, show differ­

ing ratios between any given suite of minerals. Based on

this assumption, heavy mineral analysis was undertaken and

a ratio of garnet/epidote plus hornblende calculated for

all samples. The data was statistically analyzed and the

results are presented in subsequent sections and Appendix

I and II.

The use of X-ray diffraction techniques to differen­

tiate glacial drift from differing sources has been in­

vestigated in a number of studies (Frye, 1968; C a stillio n ,

1972). Rieck (1976), working in an interlobate area of

southeastern Michigan, was able to differentiate tills of

the Saginaw and Huron-Erie lobes by using X-ray diffrac­

tion of clays. Modifying the methods of Rieck (1976), and

Glass (personal communication, 1976) and Gluskoter (1967) o of the Illinois Geological Survey, analysis of the 7A and

© 10A clay peaks was undertaken. The results are statisti­

cally analyzed and presented in succeeding sections and

the Appendix.

Textural Analysis

Tills are more variable than any other sediment (Gold-

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 38

thwait, 1971). Gravels, sands, silts, and clays indi­

vidually may constitute the bulk of any given till and

local variation from one extreme to another is common.

Examination of textural data (Table 1 of Appendix I and

Fig. 11) shows that the percent of sand in samples col­

lected from deposits of the Lake Michigan lobe ranges from

25 to 9 7 percent. The percent of mud for the same lobe

ranges from 3 to 75 percent. Samples collected from Sagi­

naw lobe material exhibit some overlap, having a range of

50 to 94 percent sand and 6 to 50 percent mud. It is

noteworthy that within the study area Lake Michigan lobe

ice eroded bedrock parallel to the strike of the under­

lying Coldwater Shale and Marshall Sandstone; whereas,

Saginaw lobe ice eroded bedrock perpendicular to this

strike. Thus, it may be hypothesized that the resulting

Lake Michigan lobe tills within the study area may contain

a greater proportion of clay than the opposing Saginaw

lobe tills. On this assumption, a ratio of percent sand

to percent mud (%sand/!mud) was calculated and s t a t i s t i ­

cally analyzed for all surface data (see Appendix II).

Comparison of the mean sand/mud ratio for the Lake Michi­

gan and the Saginaw lobe tills support the above hypo­

thesis (Fig. 11 and 12). Lake Michigan lobe tills exhibit

a mean sand/mud ratio of 2.249 while Saginaw lobe tills show a mean of 4.095 (Fig. 12). The Chi Square Test indi­

cates that the sand/mud ratio of the sample population

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

PERCENT SAND ecn sn ad 99 pret mud). percent 19.90 and sand percent samples_from deposits of the Lake Michigan and Saginaw Saginaw and Michigan Lake the of deposits samples_from lobes (Xa, mean for Lake Michigan lobe = 69.45 percent sand sand percent 69.45 = lobe Michigan Lake for mean (Xa, lobes and 31.55 percent mud; Xb, mean for Saginaw lobe = 81.10 81.10 = lobe Saginaw for mean Xb, mud; percent 31.55 and 100 0 _ 60 20 _ 70 so 0 _ 50 0 _ 30 Figure 11. Plot of percent sand versus percent mud for for mud percent versus sand percent of Plot 11. Figure _ _ _ 20 30 PERCENT MUD □ Lake Michigan Lake lobe □ Xa Xa lobe Saginaw • Xb Xb 060 40 en ae ihgn lobe Michigan Lake Mean en aia lobe Saginaw Mean 070 50 90 100 39 from each lobe is not normally d istrib u te d (see Appendix

I I ) . The Mann-Whitney U Test for independence showed no

significant difference in the populations from each lobe

(Table 7, Appendix II). Yet, according to the Student T Test (Table 10, Appendix II) the difference in the mean

sand/mud ratio for each lobe is significant at the 0.10

level. However, only levels of significance less than or

equal to 0.05 are considered geologically significant in

this study, although a level of significance of 0.10 clear-

16 - Saginaw lobe

14 -

Lake Michigan lobe 12 -

> Xa Mean Lake Michigan lobe zo 10 H UJ Xb Mean Saginaw lobe U° 0ft J—! cc Xa 6 -

Xb 4 —

uanaaaanaanana EL aa aa o D D D E b b b b b 0 —i i i I I I i i i i i H F I. i H i . FI 1 2 ] 3 41 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 Xa Xb

SAND/MUD RATIO

Figure 12. Histogram of the sand/mud ratio of samples from the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes showing the mean sand/mud ra tio for each__group of samples (Xa, mean Lake Michigan lobe = 2.249; Xb, mean Saginaw lobe = 4.095).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. (41

very coarse & coarse sand

LAKE MICHIGAN LOBE

SAGINAW LOBE

X a MEAN LAKE MICHIGAN LOBE

Xb MEAN SAGINAW LOBE

□ •

fine A very fine sand medium sand

Figure 13. Ternary p lo t of the very coarse-coarse (18+35 mesh), medium (60 mesh), and fine-very fine (120+230 mesh) sand fractions in samples from both the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes showing the mean from each group of samples.

ly indicates the general truth of the assumption.

A ternary plot of the very coarse-coarse, medium, and

fine-very fine sand fractions in samples from both the Lake

Michigan and Saginaw lobe deposits illustrates that differ­

ences in texture of the matrix sand are small and overlap

(Fig. 13). Similar overlap is observed when the percent of

fine and very fine sand (120 plus 230 mesh) is plotted

against the percent of heavy minerals from those fractions

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. (Fig. 14) and in the histogram of percent heavy minerals

in the fine plus very fine sand (120 plus 230 mesh) from

both lobes (Fig. 15). The Student T Test indicates that the difference in the heavy mineral content of the fine

plus very fine sand fraction (120 plus 230 mesh) occurring

in samples from both the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes

Saginaw lobe

80 - (D Lake Michigan lobe O

Xa Mean Lake Michigan lobe iuco 2 60 - Xb Mean Saginaw lobe CO©1 CM ©

o CM

40 - < CO

ottl s ttl 20 o.

T 10

PERCENT HEAVY MINERALS ^120 + 230 MESH X 100)

Figure 14. Graph of percent heavy minerals in the fine plus very fine (120+230 mesh) sand fractio n s in samples from Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobe deposits illu s tr a tin g the mean percentage from each group of samples (T, total sand recalculated to 1001; Xa, mean Lake Michigan lobe = 2.6 70; Xb, mean Saginaw lobe = 3.133).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 43

is significant at the 0.10 level. Again, however, the re­

sults are considered inconclusive (see Table 7, Appendix

II). Local variation in texture is often observed. For example, statio n s 22a and b, 31a and b, and 32a through d

(Fig. 10) show variation in texture within a very local

area (Table 1 of Appendix I ) . Samples a and b from sta tio n

14 - Saginaw lobe

12 -

Lake Michigan lobe, 10 _

> ’a Mean Lake Michigan lobe.Xa o z 8 _ Xb _ U13 Mean Saginaw lobe ...... Xb a DD iii 6 _ n o e DD a . on DD 4 _ OBI BBOB DBDD DBDD 2 — DODD H BDBBB BHDDD BDBBB ODBBB P l:|:l r l:|:l i FI 1 i tl il 5 6 7 8 Xa Xb

PERCENT HEAVY MINERALS IN THE 120+230 MESH SANDS

Figure 15. Histogram of the percent heavy minerals in the fine plus very fine (120+230 mesh) sands in samples from deposits of the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes i l ­ lustrating the mean percentage for each group of samples (Xa, mean Lake Michigan lobe = 2.670; Xb, mean Saginaw lobe = 3.133).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 44

22 (Fig. 10) were collected from sites separated by a

lateral distance of approximately 30 feet (9.14 m). Sta­

tion 22a contains 31.25 percent sand and 68.75 percent

mud, whereas, 22b contains 60.64 percent sand and 39.36

percent mud. Variation in percent sand and mud taken in

a vertical sequence was observed at stations 31 and 32

(Table 1 of Appendix I). Thus, because of variation and

overlap in matrix textures both regionally and locally,

delineation using textural data is inconclusive.

The texture of till is dependent on four factors:

lithologic contribution of bedrock, comminution (depen­

dent on mode of transport, either supraglacial, englacial,

or subglacial), possible sorting of rocks and minerals

during transport, the process of deposition, and post-

depositional change (Dreimanis and Vagners, 1972). How­

ever, the texture of till matrix (that material less

than 2 mm in size) depends mainly on the terminal grades

of its constituent minerals (Dreimanis and Vagners, 1972) .

A rock or mineral’s terminal grade is the final pro­

duct of comminution. Particle size range in till depends

on the original size of the mineral grains when incor­

porated within the ice, as well as, their resistance dur­

ing transport and distance of transport (Dreimanis and Vagners, 1972). Larger grade sizes of most rocks and

minerals are reduced to under one-tenth of a percent of

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 45

the original size in 8 to 80 kilometers of transport

(Goldthwait, 1971). Most resistant minerals are brought

to their terminal grade after 80 to 180 kilometers of

glacial comminution (Dreimanis and Vagners, 1972). The

terminal grade of garnets and other heavy minerals ranges

from 2 to 50 (Dreimanis and Vagners, 19 71).

The texture, as well as the composition, of till is

greatly influenced by the composition of the local bed­

rock. However, because the study area is almost completely

underlain by the Lower Mississippian Coldwater Shale, the

effect of the local bedrock on the texture and composition

of till is reduced. Therefore, the similarity and over­

lapping nature of the till matrix textures for the Lake

Michigan and Saginaw lobe deposits within the study area

can be attributed to the far traveled character of the

till matrix.

Magnetic Susceptibility Analysis

The magnetic susceptibility (MS) of tills is depen­

dent on the amount and distribution of the ferromagnetic

minerals within the till, as well as, on the strength of

the magnetic field employed in its measurement (Nagata,

1961). The property measured is the density magnetic sus­

ceptibility and represents the ratio of the intensity of

magnetization produced in a substance to the magnetizing force to which i t is subjected (Vonder Haar and Johnson,

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 46

1973) .

Jones and Beavers (1964a) utilized magnetic suscep­

tibility measurements to differentiate loess deposits in

Illinois. Differences in susceptibility for these depo­

sits reflected mineralogic differences which were inter­

preted to reflect differences in provenance. Gravenor and

Stupavsky (1974) were able to differentiate tills found

south of the Precambrian-Paleozoic boundary in Ontario

using magnetic susceptibilities. Magnetic susceptibility measurements were determined

for samples from the initial grid area (stations 1 through 57, Fig. 10). Comparison of MS measurements with lobe

designations based on X-ray and heavy-mineral analysis

(Table 1 of Appendix I) shows no significant difference

between the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobe deposits.

Statistical analysis of these data yield similar results

(Appendix II). The Chi Square Test indicates that a non­

normal distribution exists for populations from both the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes (Appendix II). The Mann-

Whitney U Test and Student T Test both accepted their

respective Null Hypothesis which state that two indepen­

dent samples are from the same population, and the means

of each population are equal (see Tables 8 and 11 of

Appendix II). The lack of correlation of MS values and till pro­

venance for samples within the study area cannot be singu­

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 47

larly explained. Several possibilities exist which could

produce inconclusive data. First, inconclusive data may

be obtained if the samples are weathered (Bleuer, 1976,

personal communication). Oxidation and leaching of the

till may change the valence states of the ferromagnetic

minerals, thereby creating a likelihood of obtaining un­ reliable MS data. However, Gravenor and Stupavsky (1974),

in Ontario, made MS measurements on samples from four lo­

calities in which both oxidized and unoxidized samples

were used. The results obtained were identical within

their range of accuracy. In a similar study, Vonder Haar

and Johnson (1973) found th at oxidized samples collected

within their study area yielded essentially the same MS as

unoxidized samples from the same location. Nonetheless,

they further state that "in other situations or types of

material, oxidation may influence the magnetic properties."

The question which should be asked is, if the samples

are weathered to the point of causing erroneous magnetic

susceptibility data, would not the data obtained from clay

mineral and heavy mineral analysis also be effected? In a discussion of weathered samples, Krumbein and P e tti-

john (1938) concluded th at the e ffe cts of oxidation are on

the iron-bearing minerals. They further stated that min- eralogic changes may or may not occur in oxidized samples.

Assuming the conclusion of Krumbein and P ettijohn is tru e,

samples taken from the study area could be oxidized and

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 48

therefore yield anomalous magnetic susceptibility while

simultaneously yielding definitive mineralogic results.

With this in mind, it is noteworthy that in this study,

ratios of garnet versus epidote plus hornblende are suc­ cessfully used to establish lobe provenance.

Second, as the area under investigation is an inter-

lobate zone, the possibility of mixing exists. Oscillating

lobes of ice may have mixed the concentrations of ferro­

magnetic minerals which effect MS. The viability of this

explanation is somewhat diminished, however, when it is

noted that clay and heavy mineral data are successfully

used to delineate deposits of the Lake Michigan and Sagi­

naw lobes. Presumably, had mixing occurred, not only

would the concentrations of ferromagnetic minerals have

been mixed, but also the clays and heavy minerals used in

establishing g la c ia l lobe provenance would have been mixed

as w ell.

In considering the above, a question which arises is,

Mis it possible that mineralogic mixing could occur such

that magnetic susceptibility appears similar in the oppo­

sing glacial tills, but yet, the clay mineralogy and heavy

mineral content of the tills remain distinctive? Straw (1976, personal communication) observed that Saginaw lobe

deposits near the airport in Kalamazoo, Michigan, show

evidence of having been pushed by ice from the west (Lake

Michigan lobe ic e ). Shah (1971) designated several weak

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 49

moraines in Saginaw lobe drift which parallel known depo­

sits of the Lake Michigan lobe as push moraines.

Examination of the mean magnetic susceptibility for

deposits of the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes may lend

support to the above question. The mean MS of the depo­

sits of the Lake Michigan lobe is 3.218 x 10 ~4 cgs. Simi­

larly, the Saginaw lobe deposits exhibit a mean value of

3.131 x 10 4 cgs. If, however, the deposits delineated as

Lake Michigan lobe and Saginaw lobe material are divided

into their respective east and west halves, a mean of

2.875 x 10 ~4 cgs is given for the eastern half of the Lake

Michigan lobe and 3.565 x 10 “4 cgs for the western half.

From observation of magnetite sands along Lake Michigan's

shore such an increase might be expected. The eastern half

of the Saginaw lobe deposits shows a mean MS of 3.085 x

10" 4 cgs while the western half exhibits a 3.114 x 10 "4

cgs. The question now a risin g is , "is th is phenomena of

the westward increase in mean MS for tills from the Lake

Michigan lobe and the eastward decrease in mean MS for the

Saginaw lobe t i l l s the re su lt of mixing and i f not, then

what?"

The final possibility is that there is little or no

difference in the values of magnetic susceptibility for

samples collected within the study area. Statistical

analysis of magnetic susceptibility data tends to substan­

tiate this possibility. Examination of the histogram (Fig.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 50

16) for MS shows overlap in the frequency of occurrence of

MS for samples taken from the Lake Michigan and Saginaw

lobes. The graph shows a marked similarity in percent

frequency of occurrence. Additional support is found when

it is noted that a similar overlap occurs when comparing

percentages of ferromagnetic and other heavy minerals

2 0 “ I

18 -

Saginaw lobe 16 -

Lake Michigan lobe 14 - Xb

Xa Xa Mean Lake Michigan lobe O> 12-1 z UJ Xb Mean Saginaw lobe o 10 - 111 lla 8 -

6 -

4 -

2 - I Fl ■ FFF -ii :m |:n i 6 i 7 4 Xb MAGNETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY r. 10~4 CGS

Figure 16. Histogram of the magnetic susceptibility of samples taken from deposits of the Lake Michigan and Sagi­ naw lobes illustrating the mean magnetic susceptibility of each group of samples (Xa, mean Lake Michigan lobe = 3.218; Xb, mean Saginaw lobe = 3.131).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. (Table 4).

Gravenor and Stupavsky (1974) established that there

is a sig n ific a n t co rrelatio n between the amount of mag­

n etic m aterial and the amount of heavy minerals in a t i l l

Till samples taken from the study area show a range of 0.69 to 6.85 percent weight of heavy minerals for Lake

Michigan lobe tills and 1.42 to 7.66 percent weight of

heavy minerals for Saginaw lobe tills. Therefore, a lack

of correlation of magnetic susceptibility and provenance

for tills within the study area may be due to the similar

ity, as well as, the variability of the percent range of

heavy minerals. However, as a majority of the samples

collected are from oxidized surface exposures, the effect

of weathering cannot be discounted.

TABLE 4. Percent range of predominant heavy minerals. Minerals observed but not included in Table are rutile, apatite, staurolite, and kyanite.

Range of percent occurrence Mineral Lake Michigan lobe Saginaw lobe

Hornblende 50-631 37-57% Magnetite 14-241 7-28% B io tite 4- 9% 4-14% Epidote 1-10% 6 - 22% Garnet 0-11% 11-16% Tourmaline 0 - 1% 0- 1% Sphene 0- 31 0- 7% Zircon 0 - 1% 0- 1% Pyrite 0 - 2% 0- 1%

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Heavy Mineral Analysis

The study of heavy minerals in glacial tills is well

established in the geologic literature (Derry, 1934; Drei­

manis and Reavely, 1953; Dreimanis, et al., 195 7; Breene,

1957; Brophy, 1959; Frye, Williams, and Glass, 1960; S it-

ler, 1963). Gravenor (1951), in a study of heavy mineral

suites from southwestern Ontario tills, concluded that the

heavy minerals were contributed mainly by the crystalline

rocks of the Canadian Shield. Similar observations were

made by e a r lie r workers (Krumbein, 1933; Kruger, 1937) in

establishing the provenance of tills.

By assuming that heavy mineral suites in tills are

reflective of provenance, it follows that ratios of heavy

minerals can be statistically used to distinguish tills

from separate glaciers. To test this assumption 15 ran­

domly chosen thin-section grain mounts containing heavy

minerals from the fine and very fine sand fractions were

selected from samples of each lobe. Three hundred grain

determinations were made per slide. Ternary plots of heavy

mineral data obtained from this analysis illustrate the

viability of delineating tills based on provenance by this

method (Fig. 17).

Bleuer (1975) had success in delineating tills of the

Lake Michigan, Saginaw, and Erie lobes in Indiana by such

a method. He reports that the Lake Michigan lobe tills are 52

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 53

Sphene Magnetite

• Saginaw lobe

□ Lake Michigan lobe

Garnet

Epidote Hornblende

Figure 17. Ternary plots of heavy mineral assemblages occurring in the fine plus very fine (120 + 230 mesh) sand fractio n of samples from t i l l s of the Saginaw and Lake Michigan lobes.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. B io tite

• Saginaw lobe

□ Lake Michigan lobe

• • •••*

lornblende Magnetite. a □□ □ • □ □ C P

• •

G a rn e t

Figure 17. Continued.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 55

characterized by garnet/epidote ratios ranging from 1:1 to

3:1 and the Saginaw and Erie lobe t i l l s were reported as

having ratios varying from 3:1 to 4:1. Utilizing the method of Bleuer (19 75) on till samples from southwestern

Michigan, heavy mineral analysis was performed and a boun­

dary was established between the Lake Michigan lobe and

the Saginaw lobe in the interlobate area of Kalamazoo

County, Michigan (Fig. 18). Data from this analysis may

be found in Table 1 of Appendix I.

Comparison of the interlobate line based on garnet/

epidote plus hornblende ratios with Shah's interlobate line

(1971) based on the morphology of weak morainal ridges (Fig. 18) show marked sim ila rity . However, the more e a s t­

ward position of the interlobate line based on heavy min­

eral ratios, such that it includes completely that portion

of the Tekonsha moraine considered as a Lake Michigan lobe

deposit, seems more realistic than splitting the moraine,

as does Shah's in terlo b ate boundary (Fig. 18). Statistics were performed on all heavy mineral data

(Appendix II). Chi Square Test indicates that the garnet/

epidote plus hornblende ratio of the sample population

from each lobe is not normally distributed (see Fig. 19

and Appendix II ). The Mann-Whitney U Test (Table 9 of

Appendix II) shows that the sample population from each

lobe is independent and significant at the 0.010 level.

The Student T Test (Table 12 of Appendix II) illustrates

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 5 6

Kalamazoo Co

Van Buren Co.

Calhoun Co.

Valparaiso moraine

Kendall moraine

Kalamazoo moraine

Sturgis moraine

1 Tekonsha moraine

Interlobate boundary of Shah, 1971 Interlobate boundary based on X-ray diffraction data

Interlobate boundary based on heavy mineral data

Figure 18. Map of the study area showing morainal deve­ lopment (grey), and interlobate boundaries based on garnet/ epidote+hornblende ratios (dashed line), X-ray diffraction analysis of 7A/10A peak-height ratios (dotted line) , and the morphology of weak morainal ridges developed by the Lake Michigan lobe (solid line, from Shah, 1971).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 57

that the difference in the mean garnet/epidote plus horn­

blende ratio for each lobe is significant at the 0.005

le v e l.

Xa

16 - Xb

14 - Saginaw lobe

12 _ Lake Michigan lobe

10 - y Mean Lake Michigan A a lobe

Xb Mean Saginaw lobe

u. 6 -

4 _

Xa Xb

GARNET/EPIDOTE & HORNBLENDE RATIO

Figure 19. Histogram of garnet/epidote+hornblende ratios from till samples of the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes illustrating the mean garnet/epidote+hornblende ratio for each gro.up of samples (Xa, mean Lake Michigan lobe = 0.166; Xb, mean Saginaw lobe = 0.338).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. X-ray Diffraction of Clays

The use of X-ray diffraction techniques to differen­

tia te g lac ia l d r if t has been investigated in numerous

studies. Frye (1968), in studies published by the Illinois

Geological Survey, discussed the utilization of data de­

rived from clay-mineral studies of drifts of differing

ages and areal extent. Castillion (1972) located an inter­

lobate contact between two surficial tills in Illinois

partially by the use of clay-mineral data. In Michigan,

Rieck (1976) made use of 7A/10A peak-height ratios to

d istin g u ish t i l l s of Saginaw lobe and Huron-Erie lobe

provenance.

Modifying the methods of Rieck (1976), Glass (1976,

personal communication), and Gluskoter (1967), X-ray dif-

fractograms (Fig. 20) of basally-oriented clays were ob­

tained using a Norelco, water cooled, X-ray diffractometer.

Glycolated samples were run from 2° to 30° 29. Copper

K-alpha radiation and a nickel filter were used. Subse- O 0 quently, peak-height ratios of 7 A and 10A peaks were de­

termined (Table 1 of Appendix I) and an interlobate boun­

dary established within the study area (Fig. 18).

Chlorite, illite, kaolinite, and vermiculite comprise

the major clay minerals in the samples. It is assumed that Q the intensity of the 10A peak was produced by illite. The

58

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 10A 7A 10A

1a

2a

3a

3b1

15a

16b

17 Figure 20. X-ray diffractograms of surface till samples from the Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes showing the 7A and 10A peaks produced by clay minerals (see Fig. 10 and Table 1 of Appendix I for the location and glacial lobe designation).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 60 7A 10A 7A 10A

30b

30c

31a

31b

32a

32b

32c

32d

Figure 20. Continued,

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 7A 10A

47a 34a

36b 47b^ . 48 ^ 37a

49

38

39

40

53

54

43a

55

43b< 56

57

44a

45

58

46a'

Figure 20. Continued.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. o 7A 10A 7A 10A 6 2

64a

60a

67

60b

70

\\

62 'S~ " A A

63

Figure 20 . Continued.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited wi without permission. o 7A peak was produced either individually or by a combina­

tion of chlorite, kaolinite, and/or vermiculite. Rieck

(1976), in delineating tills from southeastern Michigan,

obtained similar results. He stated that "the 7A/10A

ratio is not a complete mineralogical characterization but

is only used to group samples investigated." Thus, be­

cause a ratio of the intensities was used and these inten­

sities were observed on the same diffractogram, comparison

between different diffractograms can be performed without

16 “ I Xa Saginaw lobe

14 -

Lake Michigan lobe 12 - Xb Mean Lake Michigan lobe Xa 10 - u> Mean Saginaw lobe Xb 8 - o £111 u. 6 —

4 -

2 -

I f t ‘ 6 7 i l .8 ' J i ' l!o ' l!l ' l'

X-RAY 7A/10A PEAK-HEIGHT RATIO

Figure 21. Histogram of 7A/10A peak-height ratios from X-ray diffractograms of samples from Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobe deposits showing the_mean 7A/10A peak-height ratio in each group of samples (Xa, mean Lake Michigan lobe = 0.766; Xb, mean Saginaw lobe = 0.888).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. using an internal standard (Rieck, 1976).

All data was statistically analyzed (see Appendix II)

The Chi Square Test indicates that the 7A/10A ratios for

the sample populations from each lobe are not normally dis

trib u ted (Fig. 21 and Appendix I I) . The Mann-Whitney U

Test (Table 8 of Appendix II) indicates that the samples

from each lobe are independent at the 0.01 level. Student

T Test illustrates that the difference in the mean 7A/10A

ratio for each lobe is significant at the 0.005 level

(Table 11 of Appendix II).

Relationship of Bedrock Geology to Mineral Content in Local Tills

The composition of a till is greatly influenced by

the composition of the local underlying bedrock. Commonly

greater than 50 percent of the bulk mineral content of a till may be representative of the composition of the bed­

rock beneath it. This is not true of tills found within

the study area.

As evidenced by the heavy mineral suites from the 120

and 230 mesh sands of till samples collected in the study

area, the mineral content of tills within the study area

is largely derived from sources outside its boundaries.

Large quantities of igneous and metamorphic boulders, cob­

bles, and gravels also indicate sources foreign to the study area. This is more easily understood when it is ob-

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 6 5

served that an estimated 90 percent of the study area is

underlain by the Mississippian Coldwater Shale. According to Anderson (1957), who examined the pebble

and sand lithologies of samples from the axial portion of

several major Wisconsinan glacial lobes within the Central

Lowlands province, the sand fractio n of the Saginaw lobe

samples contain 34.4 percent Paleozoic lithologies and

10.6 percent Precambrian lithologies. Lake Michigan lobe

samples show 84.5 percent Paleozoic and 4.2 percent Pre­

cambrian lithologies. Within the pebble fraction, the

Saginaw lobe contains 39.1 percent Precambrian and 60.9

percent Paleozoic lithologies. Of the Paleozoic lithologies, the Mississippian Marshall Sandstone constitutes approxi­

mately 3.6 percent. The Lake Michigan lobe pebble litho­

logies consist of 10.7 percent Precambrian and 89.3 percent Paleozoic rocks. The lithologic indicators point to an

eastern source for both lobes.

Anderson (1957) postulated a Huronian source for both

lobes. He stated, however, that the Lake Michigan lobe has

fewer Huronian rocks as it appears to have by-passed the

main Huronian source area of and acquired more

granitic material farther northwest. A Huronian provenance

for Saginaw lobe tills is more conclusively established by

the presence of jasper conglomerate and rare pebbles of the Precambrian Gowganda tillite (Slawson, 1933) which are

commonly associated with Saginaw lobe deposits. As demon-

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 66

stxated by Slawson (1933), the source of the jasper con­ glomerate is localized in the Bruce Mines area (Fig. 22).

The location of this jasper conglomerate in the Bruce

Mines area brings it to the axis of the Lake Michigan and

Lake Huron lobes such that most fragments from this area

were transported by the Saginaw lobe of the Huronian ice.

It should be noted, however, that Lake Michigan lobe ice

also transported, at the very least, several of the red

jasper conglomerate and the Precambrian tillite erratics.

Leverett (1915), T erw illiger (1954), and Shah (1971) a ll

reported finding jasper conglomerate in the Kendall moraine

considered herein as a Lake Michigan lobe deposit. Fur­

thermore, this author found boulders of the Precambrian

Gowganda tillite in Lake Michigan lobe deposits in Kala­

mazoo County.

Relationship of Bedrock Topography to Morainal Development

A moraine, in the strictest sense, is a morphologic

feature composed of sediments deposited d ire c tly by active

glacial ice. Numerous morainal classifications exist and

within each there are a number of morainal types. However,

the classification of moraines is beyond the scope of this

text and only those moraines deposited within the study

area at the margin of an active continental glacier are

considered herein.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 67

/ / Goulais Bay / / / i I‘ ft Jasper Conglomerate / ; / / / / \\ I ;; '/ft ! * > » i ines '////«-" V/** ------

I ' I 1 1 i ' / ; / " / / / / / ////

Jh i ** *

Landing

//'/ Detroit

Chicago^

/ / •> r / ' ' / ' ^ - - jt ifr ♦ . * / a'// '////I // / F««W ,Si*!''> /, / , 1 > 5, >> ///.'• / / / / if L • / Hi. / / I I i ' I 1::‘ I I <* ' ''y// ' / I L !i * * 1 *+ +* * 111 i / / , / *' •/ / / + *; /1 ^ / ♦ i l l + + f / t I I 1 ' * .V / III I'* 'n | * / ' / ; < , ,! i v / * v / I \v v i i , ^ / / < \ ! • » / #! * ^ •<11 \ 'v / 1 'jk * * * / / * / ! * ? /I * / / * / / / / /^Columbus I \ , t I • * I / / / I J' It I * JL i_J ______!L^______* _ +* + i______£___ /■ ------

Figure 22. Map o£ ice flow directions during the Wiscon- sinan glaciation of North America showing the provenance and possible movement directions of the jasper conglomerate er­ ratics associated primarily with Saginaw lobe tills (after Leverett and Taylor, 1915, in Slawson, 1933).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 68

The Saginaw and Lake Michigan glacial lobes may be regarded as independent ice flows of the major Wisconsinan

continental glacier; each being greatly, though not to­

tally, controlled by bedrock topography (Anderson and Hor-

berg, 1956). The position of ice centers, configuration

of ice sheets, and deflection by adjacent glacial lobes is

of secondary importance (Anderson and Horberg, 1956). Morainal development may occur when the ablation rate,

or rate of back wasting by melting and ablation, approxi­

mately equals the rate of forward movement of the ice. The

net result being a stationary ice front. At such a sta­

tionary ice front, the forward movement of the ice con­

tinually brings glacial drift to the terminus where it is

released from the ice, forming a moraine (end moraine).

The topographic expression of an area may influence

morainal development. A topographic high or low, as well

as a sharp break in slope may impede the forward movement

of glacial ice and effect deposition of drift if the land-

form acts as a b a rrie r to forward movement. Shah (1971)

postulated th a t., the general northwestward slope of the

bedrock surface in southwestern Michigan toward the Lake

Michigan lowland may have promoted movement of Lake Michi­ gan lobe ice toward the east and southeast. The re su lt of

such movement being enhanced glacial modification of exis­

ting bedrock topography. Similarly, the effectiveness of

erosion by Saginaw lobe ice may have been lessened when

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 69

encountering the bedrock highland in the southeastern

portion of the area (Shah, 1971; Fig. 23).

Comparison of the bedrock topography to the d i s t r i ­

bution of moraines in southwestern Michigan (Fig. 24) illustrates the relationship of bedrock topography and

morainal development. Note the position of the Kalamazoo

moraine (K) of the Saginaw lobe located in the northeast

corner of the study area, and the Tekonsha moraine (T) in

the eastern portion of the study area. Both moraines are

located on topographic ridges. The Sturgis moraine (S)

on the border of Cass and St. Joseph Counties is illustra­

tive of bedrock valley or depression control while the

Kalamazoo moraine of the Lake Michigan lobe shows morainal

development with "ridge control" in its southwestern por­

tion and "valley and slope break control" as the moraine

extends northeastward.

In comparing the relationship of bedrock topography

to the distribution of Wisconsinan moraines in southwestern

Michigan, the effect of pre-Wisconsinan glaciation should

be considered. Assuming, therefore, that bedrock topo­

graphy influences morainal development, sequential glacia­

tion should result in a repetition of morainal development.

Thus, although Wisconsinan ice may not have actually con­

tacted true bedrock, the influence of bedrock topography

on Wisconsinan morainal development may have been trans­

mitted, at least partially, through prior glacial landforms.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ALLEGAN BARRY' ATOI

7 SO t NORTH

BUREN1 CALHOUN ■Bso

, *oq ----( CA8S ST JOSEPH O/.

l" m iles \

Figure 23. Map showing the bedrock topography of southwestern Michigan (modified from Shah, 1971). Study area heavily outlined. EATON EATON CO BRANCH BRANCH CO KALAMAZOO 6o°'' ST JOSEPH CO ---

J ALLEGAN CASS CO BERRIEN BERRIEN CO Valparalao Moraine Tekoneha Moraine Kalamazoo Moraine Sturgla Moraine Kendall Moraine S tudy area Figure 24. Map illustrating the relationship of bedrock topography to morainal de gan Geological Survey, 1975). velopment (shaded) in southwestern Michigan (modified from Shah, 1971, and the Michi

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Deglaciation of the Study Area

At the beginning of deglaciation of southwestern

Michigan and the study area, Saginaw lobe ice extended slightly south of the Michigan-Indiana border, while Lake

Michigan lobe ice was well contained in its basin to the

west. As the Lake Michigan lobe advanced slowly to the

south-southeast, Saginaw lobe ice retreated to the posi­

tion of the Sturgis moraine in St. Joseph County, Michigan

(Fig. 25). Shah (1971) sta te d that when the Saginaw lobe

was in this position, it deposited the Alamo and Kendall

moraines in northwestern Kalamazoo and northeastern Van

Buren Counties. With additional retreat of the Saginaw lobe and continued advance of the Lake Michigan ice, Shah

(1971) further postulated that the Lake Michigan lobe

overrode the Kendall and Alamo moraines while advancing

to and stagnating at a position near the present main axis

of the Kalamazoo moraine. T ill samples collected on the

Kendall and Alamo moraines were analyzed using X-ray dif­

fraction and heavy mineral suites as previously described.

The results indicate that the Kendall and Alamo moraines

are deposits of the Lake Michigan lobe. Thus, when the

Saginaw lobe was positioned at the Sturgis moraine in St.

Joseph County, the Lake Michigan lobe probably was at or

near the present Kalamazoo moraine in Kalamazoo and Cass

C ounties. 72

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. .7.3

Following the formation of the Sturgis moraine in St.

Joseph County, the Saginaw lobe continued its retreat

leaving a series of till and outwash plains (Tig- 25). At the position of the Tekonsha moraine the Saginaw ice hal­

ted to develop a strong recessional moraine. The Lake

Michigan lobe, however, began to advance from its position

near the Kalamazoo moraine, overriding it and pushing its way toward the western border of the present Tekonsha

moraine. At this position the Lake Michigan ice deposited

the northeast-southwest trending arm of the Tekonsha mor­

aine and began or continued development of the Sturgis

moraine in western St. Joseph County and eastern Cass

County. Contemporaneous with the above is the development

of weak morainal ridges in Saginaw lobe sediments which

Shah (1971) defined as the outermost limit of the Lake

Michigan lobe in southwestern Michigan (Fig. 9).

Overriding of the Kalamazoo moraine is supported by

several lines of evidence. First, the presence of ablation

t i l l from the Lake Michigan lobe over the Kalamazoo moraine

implies that ice passed over the moraine and at some point became stationary and melted lowering the ablation t il l to

the surface. Second, Shah (1971) reported the presence of

thin till plains over outwash plains in Cooper and Prairie

Ronde Townships of Kalamazoo County. This implies a rapid

retreat of a thin sheet of ice leaving ground moraine (Fig.

25). Third, the presence of weak morainal ridges (push

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 45b miles 1 m , Explanation D«ltoe End moraine E skers Ground moraine Outwash Thin till on outwash Drumlins I nsx IX MHA IZ1 IZ1 | | | Lake I- beds and I drainage Clay capping ways on outwash 95J Sand dunes Figure 25. Surface geology of southwestern Michigan (after Shah, 1971) showing Wis­ consinan glacial deposits (V, Valparaiso moraine; K, Kendall moraine; Ka, Kalamazoo moraine; T, Tekonsha moraine; S, Sturgis moraine).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 75

moraines of Shah, 1971) east of the Kalamazoo moraine

which parallel other known moraines of the Lake Michigan

lobe and possibly indicate glacial surges resulting from

differential flow-lag. Fourth and last, folding occurs

in the drift material of the Kalamazoo moraine (Fig. 26).

Such folding indicates overriding of the moraine and sub­

sequent deformation of the underlying drift resulting from

stresses imparted by the moving ice.

With the ice fronts of both lobes standing at their

respective positions of the Tekonsha moraine, melt-waters

Figure 26. Photograph of a fold occurring in the d rift of the Kalamazoo moraine of the Lake Michigan lobe indi­ cating the overriding and deformation of the moraine by Lake Michigan lobe ice in Wisconsinan time (photograph taken by W. T. Straw, 1973, on the campus of Western Michi­ gan University).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 76

from both lobes combined with melt-waters from the Erie

lobe ice to form the Kankakee Torrent (Fig. 7, see pre­

vious discussion). The Kankakee Torrent discharged to the

southwest as an ice marginal stream bordering the Lake Michigan lobe ice.

A slight readvance of the Saginaw lobe is indicated

by drumlins and a thin ablation t i l l on the northwest-

southeast trending Tekonsha moraine. The ice front ad­

vanced at least as far as the field southeast of

Kalamazoo County. The small morainic forms extending northwest from Bronson Township in Branch County (T7S,R8W)

may represent the outer limit of this oscillation.

As the Saginaw lobe retreated rapidly back to the

Tekonsha moraine, the Lake Michigan ice retreated slowly

westward toward the Kalamazoo moraine. Oscillation of the

Lake Michigan ice front is marked by thin linear moraines

in Prairie Ronde, Portage, and Cooper Townships of Kala­

mazoo County.

The Saginaw lobe continued its retreat from the Te­ konsha moraine slowly to the position of the northwest-

southeast trending Kalamazoo moraine. With both lobes

stationary at their corresponding Kalamazoo moraine, a period of standstill resulted in the massive morainic

system of today.

Continued westward retreat of the Lake Michigan lobe

ice resulted in deposition of the Kendall, and later, the

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Valparaiso morainic system previously discussed. The

history of the Saginaw and Lake Michigan lobes outside of

the study area through the remainder of their retreat

during Wisconsinan time is generally described in Leverett

and Taylor (1915). References discussing the deglaciation

of Michigan during Wisconsinan time include the following:

Dorr and Eschman (19 71), Eschman and Farrand (19 74), and

Wayne and Zumberge (1965).

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Tills within the study area are generally poorly

consolidated, although compact tills may be found in lo­

calized areas or at depth. Gravels are common and a wide

range of lithologies are represented, the majority being

derived from Canadian Shield bedrock sources.

The effect of local bedrock on the composition of

t i l l within the study area is markedly lessened because ap­

proximately 90 percent of the study area is underlain by

the Lower Mississippian Coldwater Shale. Heavy mineral

suites in the 120 and 230 mesh sands also are reflective

of a Canadian Shield provenance.

Morainal development shows a strong correlation with

bedrock topography in the study area. The Kalamazoo and

Tekonsha moraines of the Saginaw lobe are located on bed­

rock highs. It is possible that forward movement of the

Saginaw ice was impeded by these bedrock highs and resulted

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 78

in the deposition of the present-day morainal systems.

The Sturgis moraine in Cass and St. Joseph Counties is

located in a bedrock low. Argument is made that any break

in slope may halt the forward movement of a weak ice front

and, thereby, "trigger" the deposition of t i l l and subse­

quent morainal development. The deglaciation of Michigan in Wisconsinan time left

the state covered with the present-day glacial landforms.

While the history of deglaciation in the past has been based primarily on morphologic evidence (the morainal

systems) and has dealt with broad regional areas, recent

studies have turned to a more detailed description of

localized areas. Analytical techniques have been developed

and utilized which allow the discrimination of glacial

sediments with differing source areas. These techniques have proven particularly effective in areas of glacial

lobe convergence. Portions of five C5) morainal systems are found in

the study area. Lake Michigan lobe ice is responsible for

part or all of the Valparaiso, Kendall, Sturgis, and the northeast trending Kalamazoo and Tekonsha moraines. The

Saginaw lobe developed the northwest trending arms of the

Kalamazoo and Tekonsha moraines and a portion of the Stur­

gis moraine in St. Joseph County and eastward. The interplay of the Lake Michigan lobe and Saginaw

lobe ice in southwestern Michigan resulted in the develop-

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 79

ment of a classic interlobate area. In the past, mor­

phologic characteristics of the area have been utilized

to describe the character and relationship of the ice

fronts during deglaciation. In the present study, tex­

tural and mineralogic parameters are used to enhance the

knowledge of the interlobate boundary relationship of the

Lake Michigan and Saginaw lobes in Kalamazoo County,

Michigan.

Results using textural and magnetic susceptibility

data to delineate tills of the Lake Michigan and Saginaw

lobes are inconclusive. Marked variability in till texture

in localized areas precludes any textural correlation on a

regional scale. A ratio of percent sand/percent mud,

however, shows that Lake Michigan lobe tills have a s ta ­

tis tic a lly higher clay content than Saginaw lobe tills .

The inconclusive nature of results from magnetic suscep­

tib ility analysis cannot be singularly explained. It is

hypothesized that either the results are truely incon­

clusive, or the mixing of tills by the interplay of the

two ice lobes and weathering, either singularly or in

combination, resulted in poor magnetic susceptibility

measurements.

An interlobate boundary relationship is established

using differences in ratios of heavy minerals and clay

mineralogic data. Comparison of the interlobate boundaries using the above methods with Shah's interlobate boundary

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 80

(1971) based on the morphology of weak morainal ridges

shows similar results. However, the position of the in­

terlobate boundary further to the east, as defined in this

study, appears more reasonable as it includes the entire

northeast trending limb of the Tekonsha moraine.

Suggestions for Future Research

The use of heavy mineral suites to delineate tills of differing provenance has been established in past lite ra ­

ture. Although heavy mineral separations often prove to

be tedious and time consuming, the results from such data

are the least effected by outside variables such as wea­

thering, etc. It is therefore suggested that future re­

search in delineating t i l l by provenance consider the use

of heavy mineral analysis as an especially viable tool.

Field observations and literature review characterize

the morainal deposits within the study area as containing relatively large amounts of stratified drift. Attention

should be given this fact and a detailed study of the

proportions of stratified and unstratified drift embodied

by the moraines of the area is recommended. Such a know­

ledge would greatly add to the understanding of morainal

development within the study area.

As it is questioned whether the weathering of tills

and the mixing of t ills within the study area are singu­

larly or jointly responsible for inconclusive magnetic

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 81

susceptibility analysis, attention should be given to the

effects of weathering and mixing on analytical techniques

used to delineate tills of differing provenance.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. REFERENCES

82

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. REFERENCES CITED

Anderson, R. C., 1957, Pebble and sand lithology of the major Wisconsin glacial lobes of the Central Lowland: G.S.A. Bull., v. 6 8 , pp 1415-1450.

Anderson, R. C., and Horberg, L., 1956, Bedrock topography and Pleistocene glacial lobes in the central United States: Jour, of Geol., v. 65, no. 2, p. 101-116.

Bleuer, N. K., 1975, The Stone Creek Section: a historical key to the glacial stratigraphy of west-central In­ diana, Ind. D.N.R. (Geol. Surv.) Occassional Paper 11, 8 p.

Bloss, F. D., 1961, An introduction to the methods of op­ tical crystallography, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, N. Y., 294 p.

Boulton, G. S., 1968, Flow tills and related deposits on some Vestspitsbergen glaciers: Jour, of , v. 7, no. 51, p. 391-412.

1970b, The deposition of subglacial and melt-out til l s at the margins of certain glaciers: Jour. Glaciology, v. 9, no. 56, p. 231-245.

1970, On the origin and transport of englacial debris in Svalbard glaciers: Jour, of Glaciology, v. 9, no. 56, p. 213-229.

1971, Till genesis and fabric in Svalbard Spitsbergen in Goldthwait (Ed.): T il l : A Symposium, 1971, Ohio State University Press, Columbus, Oh., p. 41-72.

1972, Modern Arctic glaciers as depositional models for former ice sheets: Geol. Soc. London, v. 128, p. 361-393. Breene, V. M., 1957, Preliminary study of the heavy min­ erals in the Wisconsin and Illinoian t il l s near Cin­ cinnati, Oh., The Compass of Sigma Gamma Epsilon, v. 34, no. 2, p. 132-153.

Broecker, W. S., and Farrand, W. R., 1963, Radiocarbon age of the Two Creeks Forest bed, Wisconsin: G.S.A. Bull, v. 74, p. 795-802.

83

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Brophy, J. A., 1959, Heavy mineral ratios of Sangamon weathering profiles in Illinois: 111. State Geol. Survey Circ. 273, 22 p.

Castillion, D. A., 1972, The relationships between morpho- stratigraphy, rock stratigraphy, and aspects of till fabric in central Illinois (unpub. Ph.D. dissertation) M.S.U., East Lansing, Mi., 149 p. Chamberlin, T. C., 1883a, Geology of Wisconsin: Wisconsin Geol. Nat. History Survey, v. 1, p. 1-300. 1883b, of the second glacial epoch: U.S. Geol. Survey Third Ann. Rept., p. 291-402. 1894, Proposed genetic classification of Pleistocene glacial formations: Jour. Geol., v. 2, p. 517-538.

1895, Glacial phenomena of North America: p. 724- 775 in Geikie, J ., The Great , 2nd ed ., Apple­ ton, N. Y.

Charlesworth, J. K., 1957, The Era, with special reference to its glaciation: Edward Arnold, London, 2 v . , 1700 p .

Derry, D. R., 1934, Heavy minerals of the Ordovician sedi­ ments of Ontario: J.S.P., v. 4, no. 2, p. 83-88.

Dorr, J. A. J r ., and Eschman, D. F., 1971, Geology of Michi gan, Univ. of Mich. Press, Ann Arbor, Mi., 476 p.

Dreimanis, A., 1971, Procedures of t i l l investigations in North America: a general review, in Goldthwait (Ed.), 1971, Till: A Symposium, Ohio State University Press, Columbus, Ohio, p. 2 7-40. Dreimanis, A., and Reavely, G. H., 1953, Differentiation of the lower and upper t i l l along the north shore of Lake Erie: J.S.P., v. 23, p. 238-259.

Dreimanis, A., et a l., 1957, Heavy mineral studies in tills of Ontario and adjacent areas: J.S.P., v. 27, no. 2, p. 148-161. Dreimanis, A., and Vagners, U. J ., 1971, Bimodal distribu­ tion of rock and mineral fragments in basal t il l s , in Goldthwait (Ed.), Till: A Symposium, Ohio State Uni­ versity Press, Columbus, Ohio, p. 237-250.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Dreimanis, A., and Vagners, U. J ., 1972, The effect of lithology upon texture of t i l l , in Goldthwait (Ed.)? 1972, Glacial Deposits, Benchmark Papers in Geology, v. 21, Dowden, Hurchinson, and Ross, Inc., Stouds- berg, Pa., p. 86-102.

Dreimanis, A., and Morner, N. A., 1973, The Erie interstade G.S.A. Memoir No. 136, p. 107-134. Ekblaw, G. E., and Athy, L. F ., 1925, Glacial Kankakee Torrent in northeastern Illinois: Geol. Soc. Am. B u ll., v. 36, p. 417-428. Farrand, W. R., et al., 1969, Cary-Port Huron Interstade: evidence from a buried bryophyte bed, Cheboygan County Michigan; Geol. Soc. America, Special Paper No. 123, p. 249-262.

Farrand, W. R ., and Eschman, D. F., 1974, Glaciation of the southern peninsula of Michigan: A Review, Michi­ gan Academician, v. 7, no. 1, p. 31-56.

Flint, R. F., 1957, Glacial and Pleistocene Geology, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N. Y., 553 p.

1971, Glacial and Quaternary Geology, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N. Y., 892 p.

Folk, R. L., 1968, Petrology of sedimentary rocks, Hem­ p h ills, Austin, Tx., 170 p.

Frye, J. C., 1968, Development of Pleistocene stratigraphy in Illinois, in the Quaternary of Illinois: Urbana, Univ. of Illin o is, College of Agriculture Spec. Pub. 14, p. 3-10.

Frye, J. C., and Leonard, A. B., 1952, Pleistocene geology of Kansas: Kansas Geol. Survey Bull. 99, 230 p.

Frye, J. C., Willman, H. B ., and Glass, H. D., 1960, Gumbotil, accretion-gley, and the weathering pro­ file: Illinois State Geol. Survey Circ. 295, 39 p.

Gluskoter, H. J., 1967, Clay minerals in Illinois coals: J.S .P., v. 37, no. 1, p. 205-214.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 86

Goldthwait, R. P., 1971, Introduction to till, today: in Goldthwait ( E d . ) , 197 ^ Till: A Symposium, Ohio State Univ. Press, Columbus, Ohio, p. 3-26.

Goldthwait, R. P., (Ed.), 1975, Glacial deposits, Benchmark Papers in Geology, v. 21, Dowden, Hutchinson, and Ross, Inc., Stoudsberg, Pa., 465 p.

Gravenor, C. P., 1951, Bedrock source of t il l s in south­ western Ontario, Am. Jour, of Science, v. 249, p. 66-71.

Gravenor, C. P., and Stupavsky, M., 1974, Magnetic suscep­ tibility of the surface tills of southern Ontario: Canadian Journal Earth Sci., v. 11, no. 5, p. 658-663.

Gravenor, C. P., et a l ., 1976, Technique for measurement of isotropic magnetic susceptibility of t i l l : G.S.A. Bull, v. 87, p. 818-820.

Holmes, C. D., 1941, Till fabric: Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., v. 52, p. 1299-1354.

Hough, J. L., 1958, Geology of the , University of Illinois Press, Urbana, 111., 313 p.

Ibrahim, Abdelwahid (Wahid), 1969, Ground water exploration in Kalamazoo County, Michigan utilizing the geophysical method: unpub. Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Mi., 125 p.

Jones, R. L., and Beavers, A. H., 1964a, Magnetic suscep­ tibility as an aid in characterization and differen­ tiation of loess: J.S.P., v. 34, p. 881-883.

Kruger, F. C., 1937, A sedimentary and petrographic study of certain glacial drifts of Minnesota: Am. Jour. Sci., 5th s e r . , v. 34, p. 345-363.

Krumbein, W. C., 1933, Textural and lithologic variations in glacial till: Jour, of Geol., v. 41, p. 382-408.

Krumbein, W. C., and Graybill, F. A., 1965, An introduction to sta tistic a l models in geology, McGraw Hill Book Co., New York, N. Y., 475 p.

Krumbein, W. C., and Pettijohn, F. J ., 1938, Manual of sedi­ mentary petrography, Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., New York, N. Y., 549 p.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 87

Kuenzi, W. D. , 1974, unpublished laboratory notes, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Mi.

Kunkle, G. R. , 1963, Lake Ypsilanti: a probable late Pleistocene low-lake stage in the Erie Basin: Jour, of Geol., v. 71, p. 72-75.

Leighton, M. M. , 1960, The classification of Wisconsin glacial stage of the northcentral United States: Jour. Geol., v. 6 8 , p. 529-552.

Leverett, F., and Taylor, F. B., 1915, The Pleistocene of Indiana and Michigan and the history of the Great Lakes, U.S. Geol. Surv. , Mon LIII, 529 p. Malanchak, J. E., 1973, Geology of Atwater well field, Kalamazoo County, Michigan, unpubl. Masters Thesis, Geology Dept., Western Michigan Univ., Kalamazoo, Mi.

Mendenhall, W. , 1975 , Introduction to probability and s ta tis tic s , 4th Ed., Wadsworth Publ. Co., Inc., Bel­ mont, C alif., 460 p.

Nagata, T ., 1961, Rock magnetism, Maruzen Co. Ltd., Tokyo, 350 p.

Rieck, R. L., 1976, The glacial geomorphology of an in te r­ lobate area in southeast Michigan: relationships be­ tween landforms, sediments, and bedrock, Unpubl. Ph.D. dissertation, M.S.U., East Lansing, Mi., 216 p.

Shah, B. P., 1971, Evaluation of natural aggregates in Kalamazoo County and vicinity, Michigan, Unpubl. Ph.D. dissertation, Dept, of Geol., Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, Mi., 193 p. Simonson, R. W., 1954, Identification and interpretation of buried soils: Am. Jour. Sci., v. 252, p. 705-732.

Sitler, R. F., 1963, Petrography of till from northeastern Ohio and northwestern Pennsylvania: J.S.P., v. 33, no. 2, p. 365-379.

Slawson, C. B ., 1933, The jasper conglomerate, an index of drift dispersion: Jour. Geol., v. 41, p. 546-552.

Spence, J. T ., et a l., 1960, Elementary s ta tistic s , Apple- ton-Century-Crofts, New York, N. Y., 245 p. Terwilliger, F. W., 1954, The glacial geology and ground­ water resources of Van Buren County, Mi.: Michigan Geol. Survey Occassional Paper 48, 95 p.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 88

Thorp, James, et a l., 1951, Some post-Pleistocene buried soils of central United States: Jour. Soil Sci., v. 2 , p t . 1 , p . 1-19.

Vonder Haar, S. P., and Johnson, W. H., 1973, Mean magnetic susceptibility: a useful parameter for stratigraphic studies of glacial till: J.S.P., v. 43, p. 1148-1151.

Wayne, W. J ., and Thornbury, W. D., 1965, Wisconsin stra ­ tigraphy of northern and eastern Indiana: Ind. and Ohio Geol. Surveys, 5th Biennial Pleistocene Field Conf. Guidebook, p. 1-34.

Wayne, W. J . , and Zumberge, J. H., 1965, Pleistocene geology of Indiana and Michigan, in Wright, H. E., and Frey, D. G., (Ed.), The Quaternary of the United States, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, N. J ., p. 63-84.

Willman, M. B., and Frye, J. C., 1970, Pleistocene s t r a t i ­ graphy of Illinois: 111. Geol. Surv. Bull. No. 94.

Winchell, A., 1961, First biennial report of the progress of the Geological Survey of Michigan, embracing ob­ servations on the geology, zoology, and botany of the lower peninsula: Lansing, Hosmer and Kerr, 339 p. Zumberge, J. H., 1960, Correlation of Wisconsin drifts in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio: G.S.A. Bull., v. 71, p. 1177-1188.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. APPENDIX I

89

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

o

Ratio Sand/Mud . 008 . 1. 891 1.

1.191 573 7. 1 1.293 1.164 0. 511 0. 732 0.

10. 574 10.

Provenance Lobe L L 2.416

L L L L S L

XAL ecn Mud Percent

11. 78 11. 57.72 49. 79 49. 43.60 46.20

Sand Percent

70. 7370. 29.27 89. 22 89. 50.21 56.40 53. 80 53. 33. 83 33. 66.17 42.28 65.42 34.58 L aE + Hbd + Ga/Ep - 210 . .

0.144 0 0.210 0.144 0.24353 54. 77 45. 0.207 0.295 0.125 91.36 8.64

ek Height Peak 8 7A/10A 7A/10A - 0.400 748 . 0 0.611 0.288 0. 793 0.

n X i i • o • .20

u bo U) u 3 bfltH aS

S

2.49 2 .70 2 796 0. 2 5.45 0.661 2.42 1.74 0.579 1.65 4.00 1.06 4.30 0.721 (grams)

.00 Bulk Wt. Wt. Bulk

201.00 203.10 202.40 210 216.00 203.00 Range

12W 203.60 12W 10W 11W 198.00 11W 205.00 11W 11W 212.80 2.84 11W 12W Township

2S 2SW 12 2S 2S 2S IS IS IS Section 9 21 20 27 13 2S 30

gravel fraction; S, Saginaw lobe; L, Lake Michigan lobe; A, anomaly; 0, epidote + hornblende ratio data (symbols: outwash; Ga, garnet; X, X-ray; Ep, H, heavy epidote; minerals; Hbd, hornblende) B, bulk weight, defined as the sample weight of the original sample minus the / Section 1/4

SW SW SW NE station . SW 25 . . . NE

7. NW 19 8 2 5. NE 1 4. 6 Sample 3c. SW 9 3a. SW 9 2S 3b. TABLE 1. TABLE Location, textural, magnetic susceptibility, X-ray diffraction, and garnet/

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 1. Continued. qoag g a o iq o u qqgT S fr.0T XsSo 3 3 t r e i i 9 A o . i < 2 on ‘§bh *osns diqsuMOj, pnH/puts ' a TM w UOIlBiS U0T138S 8 lUOD-IScf (sureuS) VOI/VZ spduins H sSUBtf puts sqoq p/i t • * 3 ^ M C l T C H t H r H r M C M C H i M C o H r o H r o t o O © © O M C © M C CO M C M C M C O to o o o O L o © © © CO O o o o o o o t O L • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • * • • • • • • • • • • • # • • • • • • • • • i — r > o © o \ © o o © O O o M C © H r o t 2 M C M C M C o o O O L O o © © O L O L O L H r o s OC OC CO CO CO CO CO o

# 3 5 O C M C ^ * r H r M C o M C 3 - r H r H r H r M C 3£ M C oto to o t o O L o t O to 0 0 H r © 2 0 0 H r W © m : H t o t M C M C O M C O M C H r o © O L O L O M C H r H r M C M C HrH r M C -H T o o o O L o ^ * r H r M C O C 2 ■^3" W • • # H r © © M C M C O L O L o t * > [ H r O O H r O C M C 0 0 h ^ 2 M C M C © O L o o 0 0 M C M C to H r to c/5 J • • 1 6 • • © o CM C 1 i © o t o O L H r M C H r © o © O L H r O C 0 0 M C H r to o H r w 2 3 vO (NI vD H r O L M C o o t^- ■=» ^ O cd © H r O L M C O v M C O 1LO L —1 T ■*3- © i O o H r H r H r *5»* O O © O L O M C H r © © H r © W 2 W © o t © O L M C o t H r o oto t to to CO H r CO M C o H r o 0 0 o . ^ r r>* O L cd • « • • • • • • • • © M C 0 0 O L ■'=3* " 3 ^ P2 - 3 ^ O C H r O L o o H r H r H r H r M C H r © o t O C © H r 0 0 H r O L to H r • • • « O L < O L o o t o t 0 0 H r © H r © M C M C © H r M C CO O L X * 3 ^ H r ^ r CO O o to 0 0 M C © • • • •

18a. SW 23 3S 8 W 210.20 3.85 0.786 0.336 56.80 43.20 XAS 1.314 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 1. Continued. pqH dg/ng + quao-iagpn^ oqo t/T uoxqoos qqSiOH aouBTioAoaj § ^0 X ^.01 s§3 •osns pnw/ptres diqsuMOj, uoiqeqs uoiqoss quaojoj TM ^Iing (suinaS) VOT/VZ aiduiBs oSUB^I puns aqoq *§ bj ^

X co to o X> CD x < CO CD CD CD a* O v vO < CO l C H r w H r . ^ r . ^ r M C o o o i c O L o a* a* i c X H r o H r to o 2 o t M C l C l C o O H r o l C o to O L O L OC CO CO CO • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • o M C * a £ 2 H r o t o oo - a o H r H - r 0 0 * a CM rH CO 2 W w O L o o o O L o t i o i c T—i o t O • • • CM CM XI ^ t ^ r ^a- H r CM l C H r M C M C M C M C O L - a - a - a O O L 0 0 o o H r - a M C OCO CO H r H r M C t a* - a 0 0 H r H r VO LO x r 0 0 H - 00 M C M C M C H r H r = 3 M C M C H r 0 0 H r H r H r co H r O H r a* *ci c a* LO to XI O L S OCO CO o O o O O a c • i x O v CM M C i H r T r^. O o t vO i c vO IXJ XI H r l o to - a M C o O 2 » g H r H r 0 0 H r y g M C O l C o t H r H r H r ! — — vo o I • • • : ! O V a* o t W CM rH H r —! - P X i— M C - a 0 0 O O C H r o O Cl o t CM LO - a rH . s C M C O L OCO CO CO to o O L o 0 L • • • • • • M C O O v a* - a H r O M C M C s - C H r H - r M C O L OO LO LO IX XI O L H r H r fv. O L o o t a* O L O L to x e M C M C O O H r i — r H r o t y g l C OCO CO 0 0 a c • • • X H r a* o t LO a* o OCO CO w M C H r H r to o ^ r o O 0 0 a* O o O to 0 0 o O L i c l C • • • O V O V rH vO XI O L O L l C - a 0 0 - a M C H r M C M C 0 0 rH O v l C LO 0 0 O L ^ g o t H r H r H r H r l C o t O C O O H r l C CO l • rH CM O v M C - a 0LO 00 LO XI H r O l C l C H r O v 2 » g M C M C o t M C M C o O v M C o * " C l C H r H r O H r CM o t - a CO H r H r O • • : D v - a H r O v 00 CM XI M C oo a* S g»» . ^ E CM o t = 2 O O O 0 0 O H r ^ r H r CO l C O L O o t o t 0 0 • Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 1. Continued. q + d3/-BDpqH + oqa t/T uoxqoas n quaoasj pn^ qqStSH >[BSd SOUBUSAOJd S ^O X ^.OI sSo *osn§ pn^/puBS diqsuMOX uoxqBqs uoxqoas TM 3iing qusojiaj (SUTBtS) VOT/VZ siduiBS 9§UBtf OXqBtf pxres aqoq "S bk H t Ci 0 ~ y * y M C O C M C 0 O C - H O O O L O L “ 3 < O O H r 0 O L CM 2 w H t H r CO H r O C 0 co H r O O O H t O C 00 O l • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • : 33 \o vO H t vO vO * ^ c - H M C - H M C H t H t M C M C O O O M C 0 0 X < H r H t rs- M C 0 O C OC CO CO CO to O C O M C D C C/D w • • • • 34 • 0 H t H t 0 0 o c 0 O C H- * ^ c M C O O >H- H c> M C M C vo to i C t to o> 0 to to 0 -3 to o C/D C/D to H es • • • • • • 3 1 H t H t " H O C O L H t ci O L H r M C O L i O to O L i C Ci H* 0 0 M C .0 0 0 H t 3: i C O O C M C O O O O O C to o • • • • 0 0 0 vO H* O L H* M C H t H t H t M C 0 M C 0 o t r*^ H t M C O C 0 O C O C 0 M C to O L O L C/D OC OCO CO CO to CO to o M C CJ • » • • O vO H* t— O L to O C O v O L 1 t— O L 0 O ot oto to to to M C 3 0 0 0 O L O O O L O C O O O H r O C H r O i O O C H t o t H t s a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 34 1 O H r H r H t vO *r^ r H* 0 r^ to H r oH" to O L O L 0 0 m c vO i * C t * y i C 0 0 0 0 H t H t W i C o t H • 34 • H t O 1 T— H" to vO O 0 0 vO M C O C to H r H t O C 00 M C O O H t to M C M C O O o t O C M C M C M C C c • • • • • • vO M C O r-3 0 0 M C M C 00 M C vO H* O O C H* H t r-* O C H t M C H t O L i C M C O O H t i C OCO CO y* i C O 0 0 M C M C • • • • M C M C ' H o t O C M C O O 0 M C H t O C - H j r M C O L O L M C O O O O L r^- 0 0 © O L M C H t to o t . > ! H r O O • o 00 to M C M C M C 0 0 M C T3 H r M C 3 0 0 i C O L O c^. M C H r to M C CO to O L O M C O M C M C O C co • .

33. NW 28 2S 10W 195.70 3.22 - 0.201 75.14 24.86 L 3.022 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 1. Continued. pnp\[ quooaod PQH dg/BQ + qqSiSH 3[B8i uoiqoas OOUBUOAOJCd S fr_0TsSo X •osns pnw/pires , j O M u s q i d • uoxqoos uoiq.Bq.s im quao-iod ( VOI/VZ spduiBS ba ib u s . a w aSuB^ oxq.BH pu^s eqoq *S V/l ) S bjai cn CO — MLO CM T—f © rH OO cn i o t 3= o t CM LO © rH o o T—! © r-H CM rH ocn to o t © o t 1 © © LO r-*H © © © t-H CM MC Mtoto t o t CM © CM rH CM rH CO MC MC CM CM CM CM CO CM CO cn © © © OCM LO O oLO to to • • • • • • • • • » • • • • • • • • • • * • • • • ♦ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 46 CM CM © o O r-H o © in © to c8 1 i © 2 2= o t o t CM 3 OL © LO LO © CO © o o t o t o t LO I r-H t 1 rH • CM ; CM *3“ rH co © © © OO t © © © © cn © CO y~ © © © © © CM © © © oCM to o t OCO CO H cC • • • • • • • • • • • • • C- © © o t — CM T—I © CM CM rH © rH © © r^. ^3* LO o t Os2 s CO 3 © © o t rH o LO y* CM to o t ^ h LO rH cn cn CM T—1 00 00 H- C- H© rH © © © © O © CM © CM i—! © r-H r-H © o t MC CM CM CM r-H LO OCO CO r-H © © to oto to CtJ h rH © © Mcn CM r—i CO o © © © © © © n**© *3* cn < M© CM © © to cn to r-n to LO I>H ^3^ © © 3^ Or Mr © rH CM rH LO O* LO to to

. # # 15 © © O © o t o t o oto to CM © 2 CM © o© to r-H © OCM LO LO o t 00 MC MCM CM CM CM © LO OC CO CO CO oC CM CM to 3 • • • • • * CM i—! LO © © rH w w OCO CO rH CM rH 1—i H©© © rH © © r-H o to c cn to MC CM CM CM © o t < o t © 0t rH to 00 © CO - h OLO OO OLO CO o © © T—1 o t © CM 00 r-n co to M© CM LO HCM rH r-. rH t O © ^ r H© rH o t © 0©© © 00 3 H - CM M© LO CM r—1 cn c r-H rH CM rH rH © © OLO CO 0N 00 3^ rH CM 3 O© LO OCO CO - ^ h o T—1 CO CO rH *3- LO © to LO CM © CM CM CM ^ r © © rH CO LO CM CM 3= © to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 1. Continued. pnj»{ q + <*3/^9PqH + oqa t/l / t uotqoag qqSxaH ^Barf OOUBUSAOtJ s on ‘Sew •osng S pnw/puBS d dxqsuMOX * 0 X _0I t uotqBqs qusotaj uoiqoag im lUODAOJ ( ¥01/VZ apduiBg o o siubjc a w OiqBtf pues aqoq S)

O 0 0 H r o o * d * ] N C vO CNJ CM O v O t O L O L o t o t o t M C CO M C CO H r H r •=»■ H r O v 0 0 0 0 o o o » ^ c o c *-3 OC CO CO CO P3 O C M C M C M C o O C O C

49. NW 20 3S 8 W 190.50 2.64 0.865 0.291 75.84 24.16 S 3.139 95 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 1. Continued. q + da/BDpqH + qqSxaH 3[B9d uoiqosg uoiqosg soubusaoj § t.0T Xs§3 t *osns pnw/puBs diqsuMOX q.U30A3d uoiqoss UOT TM g W ( VOT/VZ 81 suiba OITBtf 9§UBd dure s pUBS aqoq 3 *S .Bq.S p/i b S) ;^ ^

CM rH CO 3 tH cn CM rH CO O LO cn CM o o o CO rH rH CO rH cn LO to LO vO cn o t © 2 CO o00 to to O o o to X < CO rH OL OL OL OLO LO LO LO LO LO LO LO t t to o t o t to H H ^ • • « • • • • • • • • • • » • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • « • • • • • • • • • • • • « • • • • 17 • • • • • • • • • • • O vo © no o cn 0CO 00 rH CM 3 o r^. 00 o t o t CO CM T—1 o © rH w s= / 2 C/3 OCO CO ^ r CO LO vO o 10 = Or LO rH vO MLO CM 00 ML ML to LO CM LO CM vD CM MCM CM rH CM CM rH o to to CO o 3 to MtoL © LO o t CM

27 : © rH O O o o o CM LO CO O © LO o CM O rH cn o o t CO CM MLO CM M" jsp o o t o t CM Hoo o rH LO 3 2 OCO CO = m 0 © cn o t rH nCM COcn CO CO o MC CM CM CM CM cn o cn o t LO -^r rH CM rH rH 00 rs- LO 2 ncn cn w w 21 14 cn CO HrH to rH o OrH CO o00 co cn o t to o t CO LO rH 3 nc o t cn cn C/3 OCO CO OC CO CO CO LO 11 £ Hto rH vO CM rH 00 00 CM 00 o to rH o O LO oo O O o o CO 3 = vo CM ■* VO o 00 00 o t cn CO o cn to rH cn o CO cn 00 CO to m 3 12 - ^ < OO i T C CM o OO rH rH to <3* © LO CM o LO CM rH o o cn oo 3 3 - CM * Cn LO LO cn O LO vO vO CM o cn o co CM O CM LO o 00 vO r—i tO LO CM i—1 00 O H r LO LO vO vO CM CM cn o co CO o O C o ctf

60b. NIV 30 2N 16W 212.40 - 0.664 0.131 26.40 73.60 L 0.358 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 1. Continued. q + <*3/^9PqH + qiH >[B3dqqgiaH pnj^ qusojcaj uoxqoas SOUBUaAOJLJ sSo sSo •osns pnw/pues dxqstmoj, quao.ia

O O H t M C O vO o s O O M C H t H t vO H t to H t cn o H t M C cn 0 0 O C J ► O C O L t H t o t M C M C s s > O M C o o o o o H u n J • • • • « • • • • • • • • » • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • « • • H- O 3 - H t O T3 O 2 O v = 3 M C to o o o o o t H t O O C cn ^ C O O H o t H t O C H r o O L i— • . i \D H t O H t H t H t MO CM M C n c O L o O L ncn H t cn O V H r CO to M C M C M C 2 M C M > C M C O * H to O O *to t to H* to • • • • • : OvO vO O O O v H t n O C 0 0 i — t M C M C 2 o t M C * H —f t— H t H t O O O O o o o 00 cn M C M C H t o t o t o o t o t M C M C CO 00 03 3 - O o j - p < O v O L O L . > r o t M C M C o t 0 0 M C o O cn 00 o t 2 o t o !2 CO i • # O N O cn o O * H M C cn M C vo cn M C M C H t o o t M C H t vO o o o o t o H t o t O2 CO w M C CO H t 00 o o cd o t o t « • • - H H r - s r O L O L o t M C O L O C H" H* O C o t M C o o J • • • • • « • • • • • • & 00 o H t M C M C O O v M C o O v * H H" : 3 H t M C o o o O O vO H t O o M C M C O L cn O H t 2 o t • • • • • • « # # : vO ^ r O L O C O L H r t M C H r M C M C H* M C M C H t M C o o o O L O H t M C O C O L O L 3= O C H t O L O L H • • • • t H t cn 0 0 0 0 H t - H O v - H O o00 co o vO 2 W s 3 M C o 3= —itH t i t— H r H t o o o o o t O L o C^ CO H O O v M C D v O O O O C o t O L H t O L H t o t O O L M C M C H t o o H t H t O [>. CO H t H t o H r cn H t CO W M C O O o H t H t M C O C O O L O L O L o t 00 CO O L 00 O L O L 98

o tH o 00 o * tH t o CO oxq.Btf 0 3 t o cn LO vO LO o 0- t o o tH 03 t o t o cn pnw/puBs • •••••• t— i rH 03 03 tH o H" o

SDUBUSAOJJ E CO CO co CO CO CO CO < < < CO aqoq X X X

CO o cn vO rH LO c o t—1 O c n 03 vO cn O pn^ qusoasj • •• ••••• vO 0 3 03 tH t o t o CO 03 to t o t o H" o* tH LO

03 O rH H* cn LO 03 cn to rH O'* t o o LO t o LO puns ••• •••• quao-iaj to r-* c o vO vO tH O- vO LO vO o LO 03 CO H"

c n cn o to vO 03 LO CO 03 c^. LO to H" tH tH cn to tH 03 to 03 to LO 03 pqH + »•••••• o O o o O OO O

t—I t H t o H* o * H- o 0 3 qqSiSH 0 3 cn 0 0 LO t H 0 0 o * O o t H CO v o o * o - c n VOI/VZ •• ••••• t—! r H r H o o o o o

sSo p _ o i X I I I I I I I *osns *Sb ^

O o o o o o o o rH o o o o o o (sureaS) •• • • • • • CO 0 3 o* oo r^. c n LO 3iin a 03 o o 0 3 o t o LO 03 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 3

2 : 3= sSlIB’JJ O O cn o o cn cn o rH r H tH tH

T3

w 110x3095 p / i W w W 3= w W tH CO CO 2 : CO z CO CO

m i-3 # # I PQ uoxqBqs c n o tH 0 3 t o L O o < a i duiB s o o * O * o* o* r*^ H

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 99

TABLE 2. Sieve Data.

WEIGHT (GRAMS) Sta­ 18 35 60 120 230 Total tion Mesh Mesh Mesh Mesh Mesh Pan (T)

1 . 1.274 3.323 21.179 20.930 7.031 1.127 54.717

2 . 2.872 5.389 21.000 14.463 5.309 0.678 49.711

3a. 3.206 5.870 16.499 19.876 10.800 1.776 58.027

3b. 3.036 5.720 15.983 20.239 10.890 1.216 57.084

3c. 3.352 7.301 21.642 22.463 11.557 0.644 67.059

4. 3. 776 11.117 36.614 30.877 6.784 0.507 89.675 5. 0.864 3.193 14.545 12.550 4.145 0.231 35.528

6 . 12.778 33.047 39.955 11.240 1.471 0.181 98.672

7. 1.423 1.697 19.470 18.928 1.399 0.000 42.917

8 . 11.453 12.610 21.647 17.118 8.968 0.212 72.008

9. 1.102 9.294 37.572 28.022 6.836 0.333 81.159

1 0 . 0.246 0.932 5.671 13.072 28.541 2.526 50.988

11. 0.982 3.367 22.160 21.170 5.341 0.521 53.541

1 2. 0. 707 3.075 17.870 22.244 11.005 0.344 55.245

13. 7.161 16.425 39.112 19.888 3.109 0.137 86.032

14. 1.948 3.692 15.382 18.724 8.653 0.599 48.998

15a. 15b.

16a. 1.617 6.755 21.663 20.586 5.923 0.362 56.906

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 100

TABLE 2. Continued.

WEIGHT (GRAMS) Sta­ 18 35 60 120 230 Total tion Mesh Mesh Mesh Mesh Mesh Pan (T)

16b. 4.373 11.637 38.256 27.487 7.553 0.190 89.496

17. 2.117 2.9 79 6.333 6.745 5.321 0.491 23.986

18a. 2.141 5.759 22.691 21.764 7.130 0.219 59.704

18b. ------

19. 2.277 6.845 22.265 15.604 3.676 0.180 50.847

20. 1.313 5.409 23.727 20.171 7.003 0.110 57. 733

2 1 . 3.353 5.981 14.517 15.972 5. 790 0.256 45.869

22a. 0.796 2.494 10.336 12.335 5.107 0.183 31.251

22b. 1.098 2.959 21.952 28.235 9. 894 0.143 64.281

23. 1. 774 6.695 29.845 30.665 4.947 0.204 74.150

24a. 2.684 6.198 17.889 24.828 8.269 0.318 60.186

24b. 1.989 1.442 16.084 30.595 8.209 0.353 58.672

25. 4.961 8.992 27.191 33.892 8.713 0.246 83.996

26. 2.904 8.316 24.276 22.716 6.442 0.378 65.032

27. 4.128 11.441 25.262 22.461 6.486 0.204 69.982

28. 8 . 754 8.155 13.426 16.418 4.016 0.205 50.974

29. 1.520 2.089 11.340 21.315 7.281 0.266 43.811

30a. 12.510 25.403 46.136 16.782 2.503 0.326 103.660

30b. 3.400 8.961 18.624 10.534 5.773 0.260 47.552

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 101

TABLE 2. Continued.

WEIGHT (GRAMS) S ta­ 18 35 60 120 230 Total tion Mesh Mesh Mesh Mesh Mesh Pan (T)

30c. 3.783 10.307 33.240 25.562 6 . 751 0.683 80.326

31a. 0.452 1.263 9.158 15.269 8.975 0.434 35.551

31b. 8.365 8.260 19.565 25.732 6.382 0.295 68.599

32a. 4.869 1.727 6.244 10.980 3.018 0.120 26.958 32b. 17.451 8.059 24.778 18.482 2.771 0.181 71.722

32c. 3.739 3.047 13.078 20.852 9.318 0.434 50.468

32d. 25.955 11.816 13.033 18.197 7. 719 0.621 77.341

33. 15.173 35.401 17.281 4.351 1.152 0.173 73.531

34. 9.130 16.643 56.940 15.699 1.100 0.171 99.683

35a. ------35b. ------

36a. 8.708 11.768 23.344 19.650 5.409 0.341 69.220

36b. 12.162 12.233 14.265 10.532 2.397 0.167 51.756

37a. 6.720 17.323 40.553 7.882 1.081 0.125 73.684

37b. 7.547 22.882 56.493 7.427 0. 718 0.083 95.150

38. 1.801 5.124 18.834 16.608 6.547 0.207 49.121

39. 5.900 13.508 21.852 20.004 3.456 0.150 64.870

40. 3.759 12.644 21.950 8.231 0.449 0.092 47.125

41. 3.201 8.990 29.205 26.249 8.163 0.120 75.928

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 102

TABLE 2. Continued.

WEIGHT (GRAMS) S ta­ 18 35 60 120 230 Total tion Mesh Mesh Mesh Mesh Mesh Pan (T)

42. 2.084 5.766 18.750 17.813 7.406 0.201 52.020

43a. 5.519 13.034 23.109 27.564 10.013 0.228 79.467

43b. 7.522 14.245 21.377 15.193 4.910 0.192 63.439

44a. 2.611 10.392 23.187 12.072 3.825 0.340 52.427

44b. -

44c. -

45. 1.659 4.884 17.882 10.092 3.121 0.269 37.907

46a. 2.338 12.332 30.663 17.576 4.445 0.298 67.652

46b. -

47a. 4.928 9.573 25.662 27.459 12.829 0.409 80.860

4 7b. 2.757 4.896 18.102 27.472 15.749 0.648 69.624

48. 2.210 6.803 32.817 24.784 5.815 0.597 73.026

49. 2.818 7.523 24.258 27.201 9.996 0.447 72.243

SO. 2.928 5.929 20.692 16.621 4.912 0.119 51.201

51. 2.393 8.991 25.075 17.768 5.564 0.153 59.944

52. 3.307 8.402 28.798 22.170 8.662 0.317 71.656

53. 4. 743 7.999 19.157 23.572 14.007 0.566 70.044

54. 5.453 11.632 30.112 31.389 9.813 0.196 88.595

55. 8.308 18.566 37.778 13.919 1.639 0.111 80.321

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 103

TABLE 2. Continued.

WEIGHT (GRAMS) S ta­ 18 35 60 120 230 Total tion Mesh Mesh Mesh Mesh Mesh Pan (T)

56. 1.537 5.039 29.030 19.447 2.902 0.133 58.088

57. 8.976 20.030 30.011 14.974 1.276 0.058 75.325

58. 2.863 5.623 20.294 22.416 11.610 0.245 63.051

59. 8.791 19.471 18.829 14.658 4.311 0.3 76 66.436

60a. 2.853 5.084 21.861 23.214 11.078 0.211 64.301

60b. 1.644 2 .451 7.839 9.321 6.582 0.205 28.042

60c. 1.309 1.757 5.288 6.689 5.022 0.261 20.326

60d. 1.206 1.781 5.693 4. 804 7.688 0.362 21.534

61. 1.113 1.894 8.425 12.649 10.611 0.261 34.953 62a. 7.068 16.179 39.868 10.869 2.377 0.123 76.484

62b. 7.565 19.928 38.061 12.936 1.343 0.456 80.289

63. 4.106 11.934 39.611 25.250 5. 765 0.311 86.917

64a. 4.243 7.465 22.249 21.439 9.00 7 0.212 64.615

64b. 9.556 14.820 25.237 10.777 3.733 0.048 64.171

65. 5.525 12.504 26.514 9.109 1. 859 0.122 55.633

6 6 . 16.860 36.151 22.401 4.626 2.003 0.155 82.196

67. 2.356 10.560 55.292 19.621 2.321 0.311 90.461 VD 00 2.515 19.087 46.050 22.203 1.229 0.263 91.347

69. 2.916 6.744 20.843 22.765 14.790 0.011 68.069

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 104

TABLE 2. Continued.

WEIGHT (GRAMS) >ta- 18 35 60 120 230 Total :ion Mesh Mesh Mesh Mesh Mesh Pan (T)

70. 12.251 24.852 18.049 8.368 1.306 0.301 65.127

71. 2.706 6.452 22.051 22.126 16.514 0.237 70.086

72. 4. 701 13.797 34.944 12.638 4.821 0.310 71.211

73. 8.016 19.667 29.807 5.394 0.736 0.048 63.668

74. 1.688 5.451 11.083 6.237 3.118 0.168 27.745

75. 7.915 19.353 54.697 11.374 1.808 0.375 95.522

76. 18.012 17.371 18.756 4. 719 1.470 0.112 60.440

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 3. Textural Data (B, bulk weight = total sand + mud; T, total sand weight) 0 x 001 0 x 001 x T 0 0 001 3q§T©M luooro^ 31[3t©m aqStOM auoorod 3uoox0d iqSiOM 3 xruw Xaboh sxnrouTw xauw Xaboh sxBaouiw (sui C x t[§i©M auooroj 001 09 qsow x 00T j b i u s sw 0£Z+0ZI qsow xisow 0£Z+0ZT 0£Z+0ZTqsoK sw 0£Z+0ZI qsow xisow 0£Z+0ZI sxo x ts tsw 09 trsow x sw S£+ qsow sw ££+81 qsow ) S ') iSt m ts S ii 3 M o x 3 q 3 3 3 UOI3B3S :).u . 1100 a U a oxdureg 0 0 OJO(j D.i a . 10(1 8 0 d T rH tH CM tH tH vO CO C-H >r « CM rH r-H o HC vO c CM VO tH CO LO MCD CM O tH C-H <3* to H t o CM CM vO o CD o 0 0 CM CM CD CO O CM - h • • » « ♦ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • « ♦ • • * • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • CM to CM H* O H t VO c CM o CD to CD c H" c CD CD CO O CD 1—i c DtH CD ^ r O t-H * H LO O CM - - - - h h h h • CO O tH vO OL O<*H* <3* LO LO LO CM n r H" tH rH CM CM 00 C-H r-H O L 00 H* o o o o t o t ^ r LO CM CM CM MC CM CM CM to c CM ^ r CO ^ h • • » • • • • * • • • • • • • • • X* DCM CD HH* tH LO H t O v o t tH c OLO CO DLO CD t c H* CM rH to CM CD t-H O LO to C-H CD I>H to CO oto t to to H - - h h • . o tH r-H tH O H t to vO o t CD tH to CM H t T—i H - C r-H to CM o r-H O r-H LO ^ r o LO HO rH o CD CD O OvO vO o o o • • tH - H HvO tH t-H O CD *CD H* CD 00 r-H tH O CD o o t CO CM H t 00 MC CD CD CM H t ^ r CM t-n o t o to rH LO rH o o t-H CO C-H OtHtH t H t LO t H • CM tH t VO CD CD r-H CD *3* CD o t a CD OO Ht CM tH tH tH CD rH O L o CM OCO LO LO o t H * • • • vo Hto tH O o t <3* H t OCM vO CM H r CM vO CM 00 *CM H* O v CO 00 CO to t-H o O L tH LO

• • 2 1 t vO r-H O VO rH LO LO CM t-H H" t-H o t CM o O o O tH LO O CD o t o CM O H . 105 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 3. Continued. 0 x 001 0 x 001 00 0 x 001 rjqSiaM qiM rj.uaa.iaa iqgiaM aqSiOM Auaojaa rj.uaa.iaaaqgiOM qiM rj.uaa.iaaaqgiaM rjqSiaM rj.uaa.iaa siBJauxw siBJauxw x T iauw XAtan siaaauiw ( ( suiba suiba 001 001 qsaw 0£Z+0ZT qssw 0£Z+0ZI qsaw xisaw 0£Z + 0ZI 0£Z+0ZTqsaw qs 09 qssw X qa 09 qsaw X sw S£+ qssw sf S£+ qsaft S) S) ^qSiajvi iqSiaM uoTrjBis rj.uaa.iaa 3 0 -uaa.iaa axduies g £Z+ g X ab g 0 8 9 ZI 8 h T T

vO rH o o t co CM rH O rH O v 00 CM vD vo rH rH o v CM O O o t o o LO CM CM OO rH to o CM LO rH OO to o CO to CM • • • • • • » • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • « • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 0 t o \ vO o rH rH o CM o LO rH Ci rH *3* CM i C to 00 LO CO O CM o LO C*^ -H 1 8 VO O v CM co t t CM O v r-^ rv. CM rH O O rH o CO to oo O HvO rH oo o i C CM CO rH rH rH o t o o CM oo -H -H • Oi t o t MCi C CM rH t rH rH 00 to t to *3* rH *3" o t *3“ i C MrH CM i C HCM rH CM LO rH rH OLO O v LO MrH CM LO LO -H -H -H -H

1 0 « O Ht-H rH 00 HrH rH rfr co LO CM VO 00 o t CO OO 00 o t oCM to CM o Ci o o i C to CO to -H • vO rH O v t to CM Ci Ci oo o t CO CM o t CM o t * 00 C*^ t LO rH <3* CM t OO LO LO CO 00 -H -H -H

1 9 • • t-H VO i C o t vO O v t t-H CM oo vO t CM O CM r-** r**. CM i C CO rH o t to vo LO to LO LO -H -H LO CS

15b. 106 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 3. Continued. 001 001 001 001 q9 0£Z+0ZT qs9W X q9 0£Z+0ZI qs9W X i § q . q i S q i t T § q i xuuw Xab9h sx^uguiw )lSt t).l{S tj.u93.i8d iqSiaM aut§i9M tj.U90.i9d SX'BA9UI^I XAB9H (SUIBUS) aqST9M ( qs S£+ qssM X tsw S£+ tjsow x siubj 0 : qsgp\[001: 09 x 001 t{S9H 0£Z+0ZT sw 0£Z+0ZI qsgw sW 0£Z+0ZIqs9W HS9W 09 x 9 3 9 9 tj.U M tj.U M S) tJ.U M tJ.U M UOTtJBtJ-S tJ.U 9XduiBS 3 9 3 9 3 9 3 9 3 9 I . i . i . I . I . 9 9 9 8 9 9 8 d d d d d I T t—1 o H t H t H t vO ^ r to tH tH o to LO to tH * H t vD O v o cn " H O CM cn CM * H vO CO to O LO o t co OOO CM O LO r-v o 3 cd • • • • • • • • • • “ • • • • • • • • • • « • • • • > Mcn CM r>* tH 0to 00 tH rH O * H t LO vO CM H* o 00 LO O r " H o cn o Cn LO O D v LO O V LO O v O CM o t H t to o 00 H • • • • • • • • • • • • > MO CM to CM * H CM O Cn LO H t O to to LO o O v D v CM LO LO H t cn CO LO CO CM H t CM o o • • • • • • • • • • • Ht tH tH tH vO - H * H O0 rH 00 tH CO rH H t H t to C7> cn H t to tH CO 00 O O tH o Ot o tH LO 0 0 0 0 cn * H cn cn H t to o 0 0 to to to H t H t 00 H t CM 00 cd • • • • •O 00 • t • 1 • I l • i v H- vo i i 1 1 tH CM LO tH to CM o H* D v o C^s cn H t oo H t cn cn o c to 0 0 » r^ o o o o « • • o CO tO - H vo tH CO CM CM CO LO to tO t D v CM H" " H D v o o H- vO o cn tH MCM CM o CM ^ r CM O L - r O D v ! — • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • « r*^ Cn < MtH CM o H t O o t tH H* D v LO H t H t CM H t ^ r o to O to CM cn cn - H CO CM o H t 3 • • * tH tH VO tH t-H o * 1 ^ LO CM C*"** oo CM H t oo H t oo CM o t r-> CM O L 00 O L LO o cd • • 107 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 3. Continued. 00 0 x 001 x T 001 0 x 00T q.q§i9M luaoxad q.uaoj;ad iqStaM sxBJiauiw SXBAaUT^ XAB9H xqSxaM xuao-iad qiM TU30-tSdaqSiaM ausoxa^. ^qSiSM SIA) XI{8 (SUIBAS) SI.§ lf 9J\l l9 llfS (SUIB.I§j x 001 U qo 09 qsoH - UUL x 001 sw 0£Z+0Zt qssw sj 0£Z qsajj + 0ZT 0£Z qsaw + 0ZT sf 0£Z+0ZTqsaft 0£Z+0ZTqsaw ^ qsow S£+8T uoiq.BXS XXI90 JL9J sw 09 qsaw aiduiBS g g X ab g t 9M 9 h © CM M C o o —f T— © t H r o t M C O H r H r CM n c © o O L n c o t H r n c "*cn c C"** M C H r t © cn CO 0 0 n c O L M C o t © O L n c t o t M to C O L -H H - H - H - • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • » • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • © V H r o t M C M C H r n c 0 0 H r t “ 3 * H r O L t O “ 3 * CM o t LO t o t O O L «Sl" n c o H r o t H - -H H - • • • • • • • n c H r O v n M C c 1 T— “ 3 * cn CM o t o t o n c © CO O L 0 0 n c M C o H r M C O L oto to o t © v -* C o o t o cn o d c • • CM © H r n c © H r o t O © M C © H r © 0 0 00 *3* 0 0 O H r CM H r n c m c o O L o t O t O C T“ H o o T—i M C H r M C t H r o c CM © v LO 0 0 H r M C O L o t O L M C t to o o oCO to O O o t CM O L LO © H - H - • • 0 0 H r H r n c n c t O L O L oo CM © CM CM cn —i T— H r LO n c CO LO o t n c to o t O L O L 0r- r 00 o t O L O L H - * • • • • • © o t 3 0 O o t i T— —ioLO L o i T— 0 0 © © V o H r m c n c 3 0 O L O L 0 0 5 0 o t H r t M C M C o t CM . ^ r o t o O L -H © cn MCM CM o H r © O L O C o n c n c o t o t t o t to O C CM CO © v o t o o H - . • • o o c oo O v © oo H - r CM CO O L © M C i T— O O C O C O L O L cn © o o t cn H r o CM O L o t • • 108 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 3. Continued. 0 x 001 00 x T 001 001 S X B J : 9 U t J iXA \ [ B 9 J J S X B J 9 U T MXA [ B 9 H 3.q§i9M q.U9DJ9cJ qiM TUSOJSd iq§i9M ( 11 (SUIBAS) uiM q.u9oa9£ lu§i9M suibjc x x 0 x 001 0 x 9 x 001 {S SK 0£Z+0ZI^S9K *IS9W 0£Z+0ZI i{S9W 0£Z+0ZI sw 0£Z+0ZIqsgw sK 0£Z+0ZTqs9K t ------9 sn S£+ qsan Tjsaw $£+ ) S m lugo-ig^ . 9M i9 § x.q uotiBq.s augo-ig^ sH 09 qs9H i[S9W 09 q.usoJSd 9xduiBS 9 5 ------8 8 T T H r t O v M C cn © LO © cn i — T O C i T— cn M C O C O L ^ c t * 3 * O O —i T— O v O O L CO o O L O O © CO © O O L 0 0 H H C c • • • • • • • • • • • • • « * • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2 1 17 O v I X O M C M C 0 0 © CM cn CM CM O C M C O C H r O v O O O v co M C M C M C cn co cn H r LO CO to o o O C O C no cn co « c o © O v » > F M C M C i T— n c O M C M C —i T— " 3 * i — T 0 0 oo O CO o t © O C O C O o co o

• 1 4 0 0 © rH © o v H t M C M C i T— O v nO cn i T— co O v O O M C t © o t O C o LO M C M C O L o —iT i T— CO i T— O L M C —1 H f t c • © X " 3 * O O —i T— vD M C cn cn © —i T— © . ^ c cn O v O C i T— O L CO CO CM r*^ 0 0 LO —i T— M C OC CO CO CO • • o M C - 3 * O C O L M C H r C r O v i T— O L cn M C i — r O v CO CM co O C to cn CM O C M C H r O C cn cn O C O C O L M C O L O H r M C O C M C O L O C o O O C H r d c • • • X “ 3 * i — t M C o o rH CO “i T“ “ 3 * © OO 3” *3 MCM CM O L O C cn M C cn cn O C O v O C O L o cn LO • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 2 13 t * 3 * © O L O C CO T—i O C CO —i T— o O H r © cn i T— cn i T— CO t LO o o H H CJ • • * • • • • • • oo © x • O L o O L LO M C O L i O H r oo o c i T— o O O O L CM —i T— cn i T— O v CO CO CM co o co co O L • • • • • • 18 109 110

* 3 * t o LO to C n a 0 0 LO C M C n C T i 001 X qssM S£+8 T • • 1 ( • ••• L O r H O r H aqSrsjn iu sd jsj C M r H r H r H r H r H

CM to 00 vO r H • 001 x O o O 00 O 8 qssK S£+ T vO o CM CM H{Sx9M ausojs^ vO CM to to to

to LO v O cn a 0 0 0 0 v O c o 001 x qsaw 09 • • 1 i * ••• 0 0 C O r H 0 0 Cn E ^ CM r H r H CM

O C M C M o to o 001 x ------LO r H LO o qssK 09 • • t 1 • • • • to to LO Cn 3.i[§t9M ^uaDjaj CM LO to CM LOLO

a r H r H CMCM r H 001 x 0 0 LO L O c n t o O qssw 0£Z+0ZT • • I I • • •• CM 0 0 CM " 3 - ■<3- at{§tQM auao-iaa r H

0 0 L O O 0 0 o O ooi x 0 0 CM cn r H LO US3W 0£Z+0ZT •• 1 I • • • • vO O ^d" CM o o q.q§T3M mso-isd r H t o CM r H

to LO Oi O o qS9H 0£Z+0ZT to o o o o CM vO SXBJ!9Xirp\[ XAB9H o CO ( 1 C M r H O t o • • • • • • aU90J9d LO to ^ 3 " to LO

Oi CM O qsaw 0£Z+0ZT L O r H o t o SXBJ19UIK XAB9H CM v O 1 1 o t o T3 • • • • • • 0 (suiBaS) x^^T9M o o r H O o o 3 3 •H •P C to CTi C n c n t o LO o O C n LOCM o cj qsaw 0£Z+0ZT LO r * ^ o cn cn r H •• 1 1 •• • • (SUIBjg) aq?I9Jl| LO o LOCM 0 0 O O

r H 23.155 0.467 2.017 47.13 11.56 38.34 9.40 14.53 3.45 to r H C M w

PQ UOTX.BX-S t o cci rO cd r O cd p O oo < axdui^s to to LO LO v O v£> t o H t o to CO to t o t o

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 3. Continued. 0 x 001 0 x 001 001 00 qiM auaoxaj iqSiSM aqStOM ^uao-isa §9 lUSOJlS^ m§I9M S X B A S U T J f lXA J B 3 H auaoaoj iqSxsM sxBaauip^ aqSiOM iuodjioj ( tuoojis^ iqgtSM x T SIAj I§T3M T § tI a (SUIBA§j x a b i u s 001 001 sw 02Z+0ZTqsew sw 02Z+0ZI qsaw sw 02Z+0ZTqsaw 02Z+0ZIqssW usow qa 09 qsaw X X . t { S 8 WS£ + S T iisaft S£+8T ) S M s x S q i uox^Bis lueoasj sw 09 qsaw 02 aiduiBg a S X Z+ absh 9 0 ZI

© t o © © © J C o t J C © o t © © © tH © o o o t © © CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ JH © H* CJ CJ tH to © tH © * CJ CJ o t LO LO J C © CJ 53 3 " * © iH * O C H 0 0 c © © © © © © © CJ tH J< CJ o t . * c * c © © to c* © CJ © © 00 CJ to Cv 00 LO c* LO o t tf c © © tH © tH ^ tH © rH © © © J C o H© LO rH o t o t LO CJ to © o t o t © © LO o t CN] 3 3 “ 1 0 - rH 1—1 O CJ 0 0 rH © c* c>. © to o t o t rH LO © J C © CJ O* LO LO LO © ctf •

44b. ll I Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 3. Continued. 001 001 001 0 x 001 x * uxM auaoxaj lugxsM siBxaux^ siBxaux^ SXBXSUX^ XAB3H q.qSx9M xusoxaj xqSxsjvi xusoxsj ( auao-ia^ aqSxs^ SI-S ^[X9M ^l[8X (SUIB-tSj q.uaoxaaaitSiSM x suibx 001 001 SW 023+031^S3W ^S9W 023+031 sw 023+031 qsaw 023 tfsaft+ 031 qa 09 qsaw X qs 09 qssM X sw S qsaw S2+8T qssw S) xq§x9M UOXlBq-S q-uaoxacj 023+031 q.uaoaacj aiduiBg a a ^C absh a 2 + 8 T

M C “ 3 ^ D v t i C M C H r O V M C 0 0 LO LO 0 0 LO M C H r *^ C i C T—i H r M C * 3 < o t i C O o t H r o t M C “ 3 * v - r 0 0 to O t M C o O H r O L H • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • *5t 5 •* H r O C M C M C O v O o t M C o i C H r to o to r—i - r H r O L o t o M C O L H r M C “ 3 * O v o M C M C O aJ • • O v • t • t 00 I • t i • 1 • 1 LO L 1 t O V i C i C M C M C O to to H r fr sf * H r O l C CM to M C i C H r O L i C to to H r H r 00 M C o M C 00 o t ctj • • • • • ♦ H r M C i C O v O L H r n c i C i C M C l C O 0 0 O L t 0 0 O L O L to 0 0 H r M C o i C H r J3 o M C ^ * r o t H r o i C o t M C H • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • l C H r - 1 ^ H r H r i C H r O H r O L O v M C M C o t o t O v H r O L o t to oo o o O C O L 00 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • O L * 3 < O L d’ 'd H r M C O L O L CNJ 0 0 O L M C o M C i C OCO M C LO to c^. H r i C to O L i C l C H r O v H r H r H r o t r^. H r O L i C r*** H r H r H r O L 0 0 o t o O L O L H r H r H r * 3 < O O L O v i C i C O v CM LO O v o O v 0 0 CM o M C H t O C to o M C O C to O L O O L O L . . O L CNJ M C i C M C M C H r H r M C O C l C O to o t H r H r ^ r O i C to o t O C 112 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 3. Continued. 001 02Z+0ZT qsaw * 001 U qs 52+8T qssW ------UUL x 001 S2+8T qsaw X00T qa 02Z+0ZT qsaw X J ( 3 X 0 9 U 1 M 3 T § [ 1 1 [tM aoxaj m H[8t9M aq§TSM 11190^8(1 3.qSi3M augoja^ qiM mao-ia^ iqSiaM q.il§T9M TuaoJOcj SXBX3UIH XAB9H xxu^ Xab9h sxBxaux^ six) i'q§X (suiexS) iqST (surexS) 001 00 g sw 02Z+0ZTqsaw sK 02Z+0ZI qs9K ^S3W 02Z+0ZI x s^ 09 qss^i x T qa 09 qsaw x uotibis J 9 X 0 9 U 1 aiduies g 9 9 M jvi oo CM O CM t *3“ O v O L CM to o t o o t CM CM o 00 o t o 00 o rH oo cn rH o t O L o t rH rH 0 0 o LO LO ^ r o \ o H • • • • « • • • • • • « • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • O v D v Ho tH LO o LO rH CO CM CM t n c LO O o CM LO to LO c^. cn vO LO to CM OO 00 to CO H • • • • • • • • • » • • • • • o v o CM rH *Ocn O H* to to cn rH n c CM rH MLO CM O o cn o l C 00 H r LO 00 G1 o i T— LO CM t O > o t !>. H • • • • • • • • • • • O v o o v CM H t O L O v H r cn o t oo o cn o - r to CM t o o t o t ■'tf* t rH Cn OLO LO LO LO 00 LO CM o rH LO C^» H H • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • h o O 0 0 r-*. H t o r*-. ncn cn r-N O CM rH T— t LO T— O v CM O v o o t O t to to nO cn CM o H « • * ( t ^ r ^ r vO h O v rH i C Hto t rH O CM CM O L H" CO CM LO CM tH LO 00 00 to 00 t O rH o t LO 0 0 LO rH rH OLO L LO O L MC Mvo v CM CM CM o t o H H • • • • • • • • • • * 0 0 CM cn H* cn O OLO L LO o t ncn c cn rH o tH o cn LO o o o t o Ocn rH CO cn CM 00 to to LO cn O v o t to 00 • • • • • • cn O v O v H t CO CO MvO v CM LO o t O L LO CO CM O C o t CO CM LO CM LO vo o vo to • t VO H* H" D v cn O L to to CM O v o cn t o cn to o t O L o t O L CO CO CM LO to o t H H 03 • 113 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 3. Continued 001 0 x 001 0 x 00T 001 x qiM auaojiod aqSiaM qlM lUSDJiSdiqSlSM aqSxsjvi qiji AtisoAO^iqSiajvi sxeaautw sxeaautw xjai Xabsh sx^jiauiw ( ( ^ 001 001 ui a ib su ui a ib su qssw qssw sw 02Z+0ZI qsaw sw 02Z+0ZI qsaw la 02Z+0ZTilsaw qssw qssw qs 09 qssw x qs 09 qssw X ) S ) S t§T9M 9 T lt[§ M i8 S q.q 0£Z+0ZI A UOIABAS 02 a a usdabj axduiBs A Z+ a absh 0 ZI

VO i O H* CM i C tH HtH rH VO ) X LO to LO to O v O v r-** c^. 00 tH i O o o t LO H* CTi rH o v T-i t—i t—! LO t—1 tH LO LO © © LO to CTi O O tH CM LO LO LO • • * • • • • • « • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • * • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • o \ o O CM O v tH t OO tH r*^ MC MLO CM CM CM tH to VO LO LO H r CM i O ^ r O) O v O v t tH CM H r CM rH — O H • • i O O v vO o t H- o CM tO I T— tH LO r-H *0 o t LO CM CM CTi to LO O H* CO C^ CM CM CTi 00 O v CO tH O o • • • • • • • • CM O v rH t H* rH O'. to rH o CTi O v to to O v O v o vO 0 0 VO vO CM O o to CM oto to o rH H • • • • • i O tH CM rH o v o o LO CM * H * H rH LO * H to O rH OvOvO v O v vO CM CM to o CM H o 03 - H o v t 0 0 to to to O C CM 0CO 00 A - H CM o O v rH O v CO ^ r tH CNJ CM ^ r CTi CO o O v tH o CO H 3 . . . 13 o v —! T— OH o t H" LO rH OO T—i OO LO O v rH r—j tH tH h LO LO LO i O O L CM CM o t O v O O L CM to O o CTi tH LO o t to o * o * H o HtH rH rH CM o Ocn LO CT> H r CO to oo to H* O v to tH O tH o t rt cn i I H* . cn tH . ^ c o OO i O CM o o t O 3 A " H O LO O v rH o t O to ^. C 0 0 CM LO CM o

• 10 114 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 3. Continued. 0 x 001 0 x 001 001 001 q.q§i9M iuaoxa^ AqSxajvi AU90A9. l C o o o o CO co • • • • " H H t H t O O v l C H t " H o H t 0 0 VO O LO LO H t CM CO CO o CO O l C O CM O v o * H - H O v O v o c CM LO CM T— 1 0 0 l C S E ^ r H t o o ^ c-~ r^» MfO CM H t l C l C CM MCM CM O v O l C CO '- - r LO • —1 t— l C o CM O l C H t l C CM O CO H t H t CO H t CO O v H t O v o t O H t LO O v • . 5 1 1 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 3. Continued. 001 001 00 00 * * 3q§T9M 31193.193 3q§T9M 3U33j;9j q.i|Si 3q§T9M 3U93JC x T 3q§T9M 3U93J93 3q§X3M 3U93A93 x T X.9Tt / H 9 B /A SXB.I9UTft[ xju^ /AB9H sxtjgut^ ( ( 1 0 0 001 ui a ib su a siub sW 0£Z+0ZTqs9W 0£Z+0ZI qs9H sH 0£Z+0ZI qs9H 0£Z+0ZI qs9K qS9W 0£Z+0ZT qg 09 qsgw x ■ * sw S£+ qsaw S£+ qsaK 8 M ) S ) S 3qSi9]vi M 9 T § q 3 1 31193.193 UOT3B3S 3 9 J 3 9 U 3 {S a a 9XduiBS 0 09 H I a 8 8 3 9 T T t 0 to to MO CM cn * *3 O CM r-i Oi CO LO rH rH rH CO CTi CO LO to OLO to LO tO OC O CM LO O CO H • » • • • « • » • • • • • • • • • o v o v CM rH \D cn 0 MLO CM CM CM CM CO rH r-i V0 rH CO * LO LO LO r*^ 00 rH CO to cn 0 LO co 0 3 » • “ rH o v O v O V CM cn O v rH rH CO CM O LO 0 rH CO to CO to i - r O v to rs'* vO rH O to CO to cn to • • APPENDIX II

117

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. STATISTICS

A statistical study of textural and mineralogical

data from surface exposures is presented herein. Analysis

was accomplished using the statistical package program

(STAT PACK V4) and the PDP 10 time sharing computer in

Western Michigan University's Computer Center. The stat

pack program is an integrated statistical package written

for terminal use. Among the statistical operations cal­

culated and presented within this appendix are the fol­

lowing: mean, standard deviation, variance, median, mode,

range, standard error of mean, co efficien t of skewness,

coefficient of variance, z-score, histogram, Chi Square,

T Test, and Mann-Whitney U Test. A complete discussion

of the above statistical techniques may be obtained by

consulting Folk (1968), Krumbein and Graybill (1965),

Spence, et al., (1968), and Mendenhall (1975).

All surface data presented in the text was examined

with Chi Square, T, and Mann-Whitney U Tests. The Chi

Square Test tests population distributions as a whole

(Krumbein and G raybill, 1965) and is used herein as a test

of normality of population distribution. The T Test exa­

mines the significance of difference between two means,

while the Mann-Whitney U Test s t a ti s t i c a ll y te sts the

independence of data and indicates whether two independent

118

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 119

samples are from the same population. The Null Hypothesis

associated with each test follows.

Chi Square: The distribution of each popu­ lation is not normal.

T Test: The means of each population are equal. Mann-Whitney U Test: Two independent sam­ ples are from the same population. Critical values for the Chi Square and T Tests may be

obtained by consulting Mendenhall (19 75) Appendix II,

Tables 4 and 5. The Mann-Whitney U Test re je c ts the Null

Hypothesis if [z|£2.5 at the 0.01 level of significance,

1.96 at the 0.05 level of significance, and 1.64 at the

0.10 level of significance. Using the T Test and Mann-Whitney U Test, both between

lobe and w ithin lobe analysis were performed. Each lobe

was divided into east and west halves and designated as

follow s:

LM, Lake Michigan lobe

1, Eastern half 2, Western half S, Saginaw lobe

3, Eastern half

4, Western half

Table 5 records the sample stations associated with

each half lobe designation.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE 5. Sample statio n s associated with each half lobe designation.

h a lf lobe Sample Station designation

16, 17 33, 35 43, 44 45, 66

10 13, 14 29, 31 32 64, 65 54

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 6 . S ta tistic a l data from sand/mud ratio, percent heavy minerals in the fine + very fine (120+230 mesh) sands, magnetic su sc e p tib ility , X-ray d iffra c tio n , and garnet/epidote+hornblende ratio analyses indicating the lobe designa­ cd • H ■ • i to Cd , tion (lobes: LM, Lake Michigan> lobe; S, Saginaw lobe), number of observa- ' / / H • d n > T3 H • H • 3 T '—' .o S / C/3 a (D H ■ O +> +-> P p ■ __ __ ------^ro r^ c > cd O 5 C S 0 fH 0 dfi f cd © © > o > 3 c/3 T3 C C •— cd t/i co to P co cd cd 0 O T3 h • • A • N N > ' e N V v— —' v— /—N / t r * 3 T CM H • H • S -H p --- U £ C 0 0 X O £ s s r* --- A 0 cd cd £ £ € cd X © 0 £ MH 3 ^ s s X s cd 03 cd c O « • • HI ' > N / A! (/) /■ CM H • H • r ■H u O o CO W T3 S S > 4-> P — \ — — £ E > c O £ o 0 £ 0 0 cd +J 0 2 C 0 O U O cd U r— 0 O £ • CO 0 m LO cd O h • . - • < ' \ \ *h E v) 0 0 X

saqoq ubow •sqo apow •PTS •Aaa • •paw *A*D • XBW •uxw jba N3S XS H • H • CO LO H r P s 2 OvO v CO l f Lt cd dcn O cd £ >N CO cd Cd * O v H r * d ^ H r CM O v O L o \ i O CO H r «d* CM o H H r r H r -•d* O O o v o t o t O O H r H r o o t 0 0 o t o t o - d < H r cn CM H r H r o * d ^ C-*» O O LO o t n c CO to o o - d * cn o t + * • • • • • • • • • • • • • * O H r O O L n c n c 0 V O cn *d- H r rH r * d ^ O H r " d * i C n c o CM H H r r H r CM - d * i O * d * CM o H r r-% ncn CM CM CM CM to co S • • • • • • • • • • * CM O H r *d* o o t H r H r " d * H r 0 0 CM H r O L cn oo O v oo CM o o o t CM C v o t n c o n c o m c o l oo r OO VO •rH O L to o • • • d o H • CM O CM H r H r CM O LS CL to •P + D < tf) 'SI c * - r 0 e g o o cd c 0 C >N g 0 cn + 0 H o cd n 4C n c O o o o o t o t O L LO MCM CM O H r H r CM 0 0 o t 0 0 LO CM CM \D MC CM CM CM CM o t LO O L CM CM o OL CM LO LO p cn ^ 0 0 H r H r o CM 3 - S CO CM CM to H • • • • • « • * • • • • • • • ♦ • K•3C •K H r H r LO o c o o v O v n c o o o o o t o c 0 0 0 0 H r cn CM CM VO co CM to CM o t • • • • • " d * o H r o O v O v * d ^ O v H r . ^ c n c 0 0 o t LO CM O O L H r " d ^ O CM O L H r H r O L CM O CO to to to o to • • • • • H • X) H • H • H • H r P P p cn 3 0 u on e 0 cn o & cd

LM+S 55 3.190 1.448 2.098 2.840 2.700 8.400 0.120 0..195 1.774 45.406 LM 37 3.218 1.372 1.882 2.840 2.700 8.400 1.720 0.225 2.319 42.633 S 18 3.131 1.634 2.672 2.850 0.120* 7.800 0.120 0.385 1.080 52.200 121 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 6 . Continued. saqoq apo^f *sqo •Aaa ’JCBA •PTS •paw • *A'0 W3S utw *HS m •pH X +J X fH B c p CO o o e I •K -K -K O v o -5 3 - - 3 -5 o v O o o o 5 0 O L o v o o o O L M C M C O oo M C p - t ■53- tO O V O v o o Lf) *3- 5 0 H H O C - CM t-p o o o o N - c O V o o O 00 vO 05 o o o H M C o t o l o r o i r H o o o o « - o r p - r o v p - r 5 LO 0 ^ - t ■53- o o O V O C p - c O t H H ! i— i—I o r-i o o O V o O L O L 5 LC O * 3O - " 3 - r - »O O O O O O H o o o o t 5 O V 0 O V O 5 0 o o o o o <3- LO 00 o t | — i O t O C S + • • • • • • 53 05 05 t — - CM M C i 53 - p 'O H t • rH CJ3 -p p • P - + u 0 0 0 c & o 0 o e Q 0 p US p ca o - O 7 I 7— O t- S " S pJ S O L l O - ^ ■ M H H I — i O L I — l CM O O 'S- o ^ o o o i—tt o i—I 5- CM o t ■51- M C 5 0 O t 0 0 5 0 5 0 O C ~~- M C f 5 - ~ t~ O O O o o o O L o t O L o o o <3- LC| /5 t o o o O o t O 5 O v 0 O L 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 v I i— M O t H O t CM CO vO O CM - l i O O O O O iH CM OWN H O o o o 1 CM CM O o o o O t I i— M C 5 O 0 O O M C o o o O L O L O L o o o + SCO I — -IOO -IOO • • • v r 5 0 O v O L * 3 * * G) i - r i - r

Chi Square Analysis

Sand/mud ra tio analysis

X2 = 0.000 with 73 df and probability of 1.000

Percent heavy minerals in 120+230 mesh sands

X2 = 0.000 with 73 df and probability of 1.000

Magnetic susceptibility

X2 = 6.472 with 48 df and probability of 1.000

X-ray diffraction

LM+S X2 = 4.285 with 64 df and a probability of 1.000

LM X2 = 1.666 with 21 df and a probability of 1.000

S X2 = 1.826 with 43 df and a probability of 1.000

Garnet/epidote+hornblende

LM+S X2 = 10.729 with 56 df and a probability of

LM X2 = 7.632 with 36 df and a probability of

SX2 = 3.120 with 18 df and a probability of

123

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 7. Mann-Whitney U Test for sand/mud ratio data and for percent heavy m inerals in 120+230 mesh sands. •H OO ■P C £ 3 CO t f OS O ►a t - r • > X T3 H • rH rH OO s ! S I 2 Q +J CD > > o > c CO f-i 0 > cn cO cu cO cfl fH cO CSl J S C : —I O r M C M C i - r H r I *— cm —( T— © o o i T C M C t M C i ~ r M C O L o o o H r © o o l o M C © o o O t O L o o o H r H r H r O t © © © © © © © o c c 0 0 — i • * • • • • • « • • • • • • • • ♦ • • « • • • • • • • • « • i © *3- 3 •* © H r M C M C M C M C M C © © © M C M C © ^> C M C o © o M C © o © H r M C H r o n t © © © © © © © O O o c o o ^ M C H r © H r © H r © M C H r © © O O H r H r O L H r © o © © © © © © © o t o t o t © • © © o t © © © H r M C © M C O L M C © © © © © © © © © o t M C O C © © © © © o © M C H r H r H r • • • • H r M C ■*3* M C O L © x r o t H r H r 0 0 o c © o t o o © © O L H r o t © - co o t H r M C 0 0 o t O L © © © O L H r 3 1 - oo- M C O C XI © M C © O L © © © © © O L © M C M C O L H r a, x) x: K> •H CM o CM o •H i—i 4 + cn 0 5 S > 0 c £ o cn CO cn 0 c 0 cO > s c cO cn u X -> h x © O C s 2 H r H * x Q © i—i •rH CM -> 4 0 > 0 C > cC 0 X 0 cn > cO > cO fi c0 c0 H r M C H r M C • • * 3 * H r M C H r M C © to O C © © © 0 0 © O L M C © to o © H r H r O C 0 0 M C © © © © © © © © © O L H r M C ^ r ! 2 O f M C M C H r H r H r M C M C o t M C CM *= CO 1 • • • ♦ • • • • • • • • • • • • ^ r © H r H r H r H r M C © M C © M C H r H r H r © © H r © H r H r © © © © © © © © © © © © O L * 3 < M C H r H r M C © O L © H r • • • • • © © © o o © © © © © © © © o © o t © © M C o t M C H r to o t 3 • • • • « • • « • • - CO -vf -vf CO- H r © M C H r 0 0 © © o to to M C © © © H r H r M C M C H r M C M C O L o t 0 0 o t H r H r H r © © H r 1^ O O C C O L © O C © © © H r to © © © to © © © O L M C © • • • M C O C H r © © © © © © H r 0 0 * 3 * © H r t © H r H r © M C © H r X3 © oo © - 3 * © © © M C © O L © 00 124 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 8 . Mann-Whitney U Test for magnetic susceptibility data and for X-ray d if f ra c ­ tion data. O r •rH •H •rH •rH S P P p o 3

P P H • H r H • H r Q o c P « > (D > O c u cO CO > CO P d c < n c n c H r 0 > 3 S 0 CO M C d H r M C • H r —j r O v H r t H r M C o t H r 0 0 H r o H r H r H r M C n c o n c o o O o o o o o O o o O o t o o O o O L O L O L o O L o o O v i O o n c o t 0 0 o t -H • • • • • • • • * • • • • • • • • • • • • • H r H r H r M C H r H r M C O L 0 0 n c o t o o o O L O L O L O L o o t O L o t 1 - r • • • o v H r o O “ 3 * H r 0 0 O L o t 0 0 M C O O O VO O L CO o o O o o M C 0 0 1 o t H r H r M C VO o o O O v H r H r n c n c o O H r o o o 0 0 o t o t O L H r M C o t • • • • H r H r H r O v H r O L O o o o O L o o M C o O H r O H r 0 0 O L 0 0 o t o t O o t M C • • H r H r 0 0 o o H r o t o o O o O O M C H r o o o o o O M C H r O O L O L 0 0 O L • • o t N p s O C H r o t o v o O O L O L n c o t o o o t o o t o t 1 • •rH

Doo o S CD > S c U) CO cO co CO H r M C H r M C h ••• • • » • • • • : c h M C O v H r H r p n c M C O L n c H r o o o o o o t n c o o O o o ^ c o o o O M C M C N C "- o '- O CO rO" 'O- to CN) CO "3- O O M C O L M C o t H H H 1 • • • • • • • • HC e H M C M C H r M C H r n c O v o o o o O v n c O o O H r M C o O v O L H r o v H r O L H r o t n c o o ^ M C M C H r n c O M C r f s • O M C H r o o M C o O o O o o o O o O o o o l M C M C M C o t H r H O r t M C H r O t H r * 3 < o t o o o o o o o o o o o o O t O v N O L O O o o o o o ) s O O O L - N I 0 O H r O L O L O O L o t 0 0 • • • • • • ) • • • • • • o t o v o t o r i HC e H e H 00 M O S S tO 5 0 CM

3 o t o l o l 3 . N [ o t o O L ^ * C H r H r o o o o o M C H r M C o o c o t H r M C 0 0 0 0 O L O L O L o • • • • • • • • o n c n c O M C M C O L O L M C o o O v 0 0 P O o 0 0 o o O L n c 125 <4H •H H r • H r • o LO p p > 0 0 CO DO e o S3 significant at 0.01 level; ** cO CO Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. without prohibited reproduction Further owner. copyright the of permission with Reproduced

TABLE 9. Mann-Whitney U Test for garnet/epidote+hornblende data. X> rH JD •H •H 2 CO o s CM -P > ctfft 5 a > CO CD > CD S a! CO h cvj CM ••• » • • • • • • • MC CM CM tO CM H rH rH CM CM tH tH rH tH CM t tH 00 o o o o o o CM o o o o o o O o o o c CM to LO o o CM O oo ^ r 00 o C^s —1 1 • • ••• • • • • • • • ••* • * • • • • • ••• ♦ • • • • • • • rH CM o MC tO CM CM O CM rH vO tH H* MCMCM ^ o o o O H t o O CM o o o o o o o o to 3 C * * CM - H 00 o M M 2 O f CM CM H r CM * rH CM CM CM tH o o CM tH tH ' CM O') i o Oi h -H* H* * CM H* 00 CM o o o ot to ooto tH tH o o o o o o o o LO LO • • * ML O LO CM o O CM CTi CTi *K t oCM to o o OL O LO LO O O 1—1 OL o LO LO o o to to — O t—i 00 i O Ot O tH LO Hv Is* vO tH OCM LO H • • • H CM rH LO H- * O H* CM LO o o o o tH o o o o rH i O LO O LO CM O 00 tH O I - r tH *x tH i O o oo LO CM 3 “

significant at 0.01 level 126 127 - - S S 1. 327 1. 0.000 0.000 1.634 ------LM LM 1.634* 0.000 1.327* 0.000 — --- — — M 3 3 4 -- 3 3 4 0.000 0.000 0.560 0.000 -0.253 0.000 Calculated T Value Calculated T Value “ _ 2 0. 0. 876 0.000 0.000 409 1. “ --- ~ 1 --- 000 1 2 . . 0. 7530.493 1.056 1.067 436 1. -0.592 -0.781 ratio data and for percent heavy minerals in 120+230 2 4 1 0.000 1 0 33 0. 72 2 S 4 S LM LM V ar. Var. level Mean Mean . 818 . 3.133 3.1723.021 2.670 3 2.578 2 4.095 3.331 2.249 5.530 2.034 2.512 0.100 25 14 12 49 21 25 21 14 12 49 T T Test for sand/mud mesh mesh sands. Si ze Si Var. Var. Size Var. Var. ra tio data • • 1. 503 1. 1.657 382 1. 423 1. 4.095 1.051 2.249 1. 1. 758 27 1.608 27 Dev. Std. 2.480 Dev. Std. 4.042 * * significant at 11.890 Sand/mud TABLE 10 TABLE Percent heavy minerals in 120+230 mesh sands

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 128 * t-" O o o o o 0 3 O 03 1 1 1 1 CM O cn 0 3 O CC • • +-> o o CO O 03 1 T5

G ■K O o O O ‘H o o O 0 3 P s t 1 1 1 O CM I O 0 3 u p • • 03 o o o to P 1

• P o i E- X G3 P 0 o p o r " o o

P o o o o 4 4 •H 1 1 r - 1 •H * -O * •3C •K •H O O oo LO o t o 00 CM P O CM Mt LO o LO H - O cu rH O LO LO P t 1 o 0> CM O 0 • • • • • • • •

u o p o o o CM 1 1 C/3 3 c/)

u P rH CM t o P J2 03 P •P G r j cO rH CM tO p - ^ 03 4-> > > r-J 0 r-c 5b CO £ X . r-1 LO LO LO 'O' CO tH • G t o 03 P PG t"- O 00 rH rH tO P G CM rH P •rH G 0 OO LO O P CM p G 0 00 r-» o tH > s • ••••• > 2 •

P IS) O LO CM tO O 'O' Ex t/3 G •H H H tH tO tH G CO *H C M C M i—1 i—I 'O ’ CM 3 > 03 P 03 03

O Is* to CTi to O CO G3 > rH rH «a tso P 0 • ••••• P P 0 • • < G 3/3 =1 O t—It—1 H i—1 t—! 1 03 n o o ** ** significant at 0.050 level E- s X * significant at 0.005 level

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 129 - - s 0.000 11.610' - -- LM 0 .000 11.610* _ “ - - 4 0 .0 0 0 “ --- — 0 .0 0 0 -1.151 Calculated T Value “ 2 .101* 8 0 .0 0 0 “ --- 1 6.356* -0 . 562 . -0 12 0 .0 0 0 3 7.784* 9.918* S LM V ar. Var. Mean 0. 337 0. 0.161 0. 316 4 0. 350 0.170 49 0.166 27 21 14 12 Size Var. 0.073 25 0.051 0.072 0.772 0.045 0.059 Eld. Dev. * * significant at 0.005 level TABLE 12. TABLE T Test for garnet/epidote+hornblende data.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.